Shimla: The Himachal Pradesh High Court recently set aside the trial court’s conviction of a husband, his mother, and his brother in a dowry harassment and abetment of suicide case, stating that broad and vague allegations cannot establish cruelty. Justice Rakesh Kainthla delivered the judgment, citing the need for evidence-based claims in matrimonial disputes.

Justice Kainthla referenced the Supreme Court ruling in Kailashben Mahendra Bhai Patel vs. State of Maharashtra, which held that general claims of cruelty or harassment against a spouse or in-laws are insufficient for sustaining criminal convictions. He emphasized that allegations must point to specific acts committed with criminal intent.

The court observed that compelling individuals to face criminal trials based on vague accusations amounts to an abuse of judicial process. Justice Kainthla stated that forcing the accused to defend themselves without concrete instances on record undermines the principles of justice and fairness.

Also Read: Barron Trump and Danish Princess Marriage Proposal for Greenland Dowry Goes Viral

The case concerned Sapna alias Kiran, who was married to Ram Pal in March 2007. Allegedly, her husband, mother-in-law Meenki Devi, and brother-in-law Sanjeev Kumar demanded dowry and subjected her to harassment. In 2008, she consumed pesticide, resulting in her death. The trial court had convicted the accused under Section 498(A) of the IPC (dowry harassment) and Section 306 read with Section 34 (abetment of suicide).

The Himachal High Court, after reviewing the evidence, found the allegations too vague to establish criminal liability and quashed the convictions. The ruling underscores the judiciary’s insistence on evidence-based prosecution in cases of dowry harassment and highlights the limits of relying solely on general claims in matrimonial disputes.

Also Read: Bihar Man Marries Three Women in Three Years, Lands in Jail for Dowry Harassment