Rupali Devi vs State of Uttar Pradesh

 

Rupali Devi vs State of Uttar Pradesh

 

Title: Courts in the location where the wife seeks shelter have jurisdiction to hear cases filed under sec 498A IPC: Supreme Court

Name of the Case: Rupali Devi vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Citation: Civil Appeal 71 of 2012, 2019 (5) SCC 384

Bench: Hon’ble Justice Ranjan Gogoi, J L.Nageswara Rao&J Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Date of Judgement: 9^th April, 2019

 

Facts of the Case:

Petitioner Rupali Devi had parental house in Deoria and was married to respondent in December, 1997 living in Mau with his family. Sufficient amount of money and dowry was given to respondent by the family of petitioner at the time of marriage but the accused persons and family of respondentwas not satisfied with the amount and maltreated& harassed the petitioner demanding Rs 2 lacs and a Car. She informed the same to her father, then her father visited her sasural andtried to convince the accused person and his family but they remained adamant about their demand.

On 12th May 1998, the petitioner gave birth to a son and even after birth of a son, accused persons continued the harassment of the petitioner. When petitioner got pregnant again, the accused persons forcibly got her aborted at Dr Saxena’s Ladies Clinic in Mau.

In July 2002, the accused persons turned out the petitioner Rupali Devi of her matrimonial home at Mau and kept her son with them. Her father took petitioner to her parental home at Deoria and continuously tried to convince the accused persons family.

On 14th April 2005, around 4 pm, accused persons came to the house of the petitioner at Deoria to compromise and expressed their willingness to take the petitioner with them to Mau. After some hesitance, the petitioner again went to her matrimonial house, but after reaching there, she found that one stranger woman living with the family of the accused was the second wife of petitioner’s husband. When the petitioner protested for the same, the accused persons assaulted her and made her sign some blank documents.

On 27th May 2005, after signing divorce paper the petitioner was turned out of house came to Deoria and disclosed all the facts about what happened to her father and on 17th Sept Petitioner filed complaint in Police Station Kotwali at Deoria against accused persons for offences under Sec 313, 498A, 494, 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

 

Issues raised before the Court:

1. Whether forcing a woman to leave her matrimonial home by acts and conduct amounting to cruelty can initiate and access the legal process within the jurisdiction of the courts?

 

Observation and Judgement of the Court:

Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the term “cruelty” given under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code can be both physical cruelty or mental cruelty and held that adverse effects on the mental health in the parental home by the acts committed would amount to commission of cruelty within the ambit of Sec 498A at the parental home.

SC also observed that Sec 178 provides an exception to the ordinary rule given in Sec 177 which allows courts in another local area to take cognizance of the offense committed. Therefore, Supreme Court accepted the appeal and overruled High Court’s acquittal and held respondent guilty of the offense punishable under Sec 498A of IPC.

Supreme Court also held that the courts in the locality where the wife seek shelter or refuge after leaving or being forcibly driven from the matrimonial home due to acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his family members also have jurisdiction to hear a complaint filed under Sec 498-A of IPC.