By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
ApniLawApniLawApniLaw
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Reading: Patna High Court: Calling Wife ‘Bhoot’, ‘Pisach’ Not Cruelty under Section 498A IPC
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
ApniLawApniLaw
Font ResizerAa
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court
  • Acts
  • Documentation
  • BNSS
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
  • Advertise
© 2022 Foxiz News Network. Ruby Design Company. All Rights Reserved.
ApniLaw > Blog > High Court > Patna High Court: Calling Wife ‘Bhoot’, ‘Pisach’ Not Cruelty under Section 498A IPC
High CourtNews

Patna High Court: Calling Wife ‘Bhoot’, ‘Pisach’ Not Cruelty under Section 498A IPC

Apni Law
Last updated: December 16, 2024 1:03 am
Apni Law
1 year ago
Share
Patna High Court: Calling Wife 'Bhoot', 'Pisach' Not Cruelty under Section 498A IPC
Patna High Court: Calling Wife 'Bhoot', 'Pisach' Not Cruelty under Section 498A IPC
SHARE

In a recent judgment, the Patna High Court clarified that calling wife “Bhoot”, “Pisach” (flesh-eating demon) used by a husband do not amount to ‘cruelty’ under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Justice Bibek Chaudhuri emphasized that while failed marriages may involve unpleasant language, not all instances of verbal abuse qualify as cruelty.

The case [M v F] involved a revision petition by a man and his father who were convicted under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The complaint alleged dowry demands and physical assault on the daughter of the complainant, including verbal abuse using derogatory terms.

However, the High Court set aside the conviction, highlighting the absence of specific allegations and evidence supporting the charges. It noted that the complainants failed to produce crucial letters during the trial, and there was no medical evidence of assault on the woman.

The Court also observed that the allegations of calling the woman derogatory names were insufficient to establish cruelty, especially considering the lack of corroborative evidence. It concluded that the case appeared to stem from personal disputes rather than criminal acts.

Ultimately, the High Court allowed the revision petition, quashing the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court. This judgment underscores the importance of substantiated allegations in cases of matrimonial discord and highlights the need for evidence-based legal proceedings.

You Might Also Like

Section 113 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS) – Letter Of Request From A Country Or Place Outside India To A Court Or An Authority For Investigation In India.

Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal’s ED Custody Extended in Liquor Policy Scam: Key Updates

CrPC Section 276: Record of Trial Before Court of Session

CrPC Section 95: Forfeiture of Publications & Search Warrants

What Are The Legal Provisions for Freezing Bank Accounts in Cybercrime Cases in India

TAGGED:CrueltyDowry Prohibition Actlegal proceedingsMatrimonial DisputesPatna High CourtSection 498A IPCVerbal Abuse
Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Previous Article Bombay HC Grants Bail to Rape Accused; Questions Feasibility of Crime at Crowded Beach on Eid Bombay HC Grants Bail to Rape Accused; Questions Feasibility of Crime at Crowded Beach on Eid
Next Article Justice Ravindra Bhat Raises Concerns Over Supreme Court's Handling of Article 370 Verdict Justice Ravindra Bhat Raises Concerns Over Supreme Court’s Handling of Article 370 Verdict
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow US

Find US on Social Medias
FacebookLike
XFollow
InstagramFollow
YoutubeSubscribe

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
Popular News
POCSO Act
CriminalDelhi High CourtHigh CourtNews

Consensual Love Among Teenagers Should Not Be Criminalized Under POCSO: Delhi HC

Amna Kabeer
By Amna Kabeer
4 months ago
Supreme Court Permits NGT Pune To Form Virtual Bench Due To Member’s Health Issues
Step-Parent Adoption Requires Biological Parent’s Consent: Kerala HC
Supreme Court Orders Husband To Pay Rs. 2 Crores As Alimony
What Are The Legal Provisions for Freezing Bank Accounts in Cybercrime Cases in India
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
Ad imageAd image

Your one-stop destination for legal news, articles, queries, and a directory of lawyers in India – all under one roof at ApniLaw.

Stay Updated

  • BNSS
  • News
  • Documentation
  • Acts
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court

Information

  • ApniLaw Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service

Advertise

  • Advertise with us
  • Newsletters
  • Deal

Find Us on Socials

ApniLawApniLaw
Follow US
© ApniLaw 2025. All Rights Reserved.
bg-n
Join Us!
Subscribe to our newsletter and never miss our latest news, podcasts etc..
Zero spam, Unsubscribe at any time.

More Interesting News

Prisoner Freed Despite Missing File By Calcutta High Court

Punishment and Legal Action Under Section 6 of Indecent Representation of Women Act

Media & Entertainment Law: Career Insights And Opportunities

What Content Is Banned and What’s Allowed Under the Indecent Representation of Women Act? (Sections 3, 4 and 5)

login
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?