The High Court of Karnataka has said that not having physical relationship after marriage would not amount to cruelty under IPC section 498A, but amount to cruelty under section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act due to non-consummation of marriage.

The couple got married in December 2019 and stayed together only for 28 days. After that the wife filed a complaint in February 2020. Though the complaint was against the in-laws as well, the main grievance of the wife was against her husband, who is a follower of Brahmakumari.

The husband is accused of always watching videos of Brahmakumari sister Shivani. The husband would tell his wife that he was not interested in physical relationship and that love is not about getting physical and should have soul to soul love. On the other hand, the allegation against the in-laws was that they had demanded dowry at the time of marriage and instigated their son for taking dowry.

In the similar proceedings, on the petition filed by the wife, the family court had passed the decree, annulling the marriage. The high court observed that the decree was on the ground that the husband did not have physical relationship with the wife. The husband and his parents moved the high court questioning the proceedings for offences under IPC section 498A and section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The high court noted that the parents did not stay with the couple. The court further observed that in those 28 days that the couple lived together, neither the complainant wife nor the charge sheet narrated any incident that would become an ingredient of IPC section 498A.
Justice M Nagaprasanna said that the only grievance was that the husband never intended to have a physical relationship with his wife.

“This would undoubtedly amount to cruelty due to non-consummation of marriage under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act and not cruelty as is defined under Section 498A of the IPC. It is on the basis of such cruelty a decree of divorce is granted to the complainant and on the same basis, criminal proceedings cannot be permitted to be continued,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.

“Cruelty would mean any willful conduct which is of the nature as is likely to drive a woman to commit suicide or cause grave injury or danger to the life of the woman. The other part is harassment, where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand. The section itself punishes the husband or the relative who subjects a woman to such cruelty. A perusal at the complaint would indicate no ingredient of any cruelty,” the court added.

Case Title: ABC & Others And State of Karnataka & ANR

Case No: CRIMINAL PETITION No.7067 OF 2021