The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific evidence and continuous mental or physical torture to establish the offence of cruelty under Section 498A IPC. The court emphasized the need for a strict interpretation of 'cruelty' as defined under the law and highlighted the absence of specific evidence supporting the allegations.

Sandeep Sharma, J.

Instant criminal revision petition is directed against judgment dated 9.12.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan, in Cr. Appeal No. 08-Cr.A/10 of 2006, affirming judgment and order of conviction dated 16.2.2006/17.2.2006 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Case No. 22/2 of 2005, whereby the learned trial Court while holding petitioner guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 498A IPC, convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment, for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.

2. Briefly stated the facts as emerge from the record are that the complainant, namely Promila Devi, who happened to be wife of the petitioner Ramesh Chand, lodged an FIR i.e. Ext. PW-1/A in the Police Station, stating therein that her marriage was solemnized with petitioner on 23.6.2004 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies and local customs. After two months of marriage, in the month of August, 2004, petitioner and other accused persons i.e. father-in-law, mother-in-law and sister-in-law of the complainant, started maltreating her. She further stated that she kept on tolerating the atrocities of the petitioner so that family does not break. She also complained that she was not provided with clothes and shoes to wear and whenever she asked her husband for such things, he did not behave properly. Complainant further reported to the police that petitioner repeatedly teased her that she had not brought any money at the time of her marriage and she replied that since her parents are poor, she was not able to give them anything. Complainant further reported that whenever, accused accompanied her to her parents’ house in village Dhali Dibber, Tehsil Rajgarh, he did not stay with her, rather visited other ladies in the village. She further alleged that with the passage of time, petitioner started proclaiming that he would not keep her at his house. His beatings increased with the passage of time. Finally, after becoming totally helpless, she narrated entire facts to her parents and sister, who repeatedly counseled petitioner to behave properly with the complainant but to no avail. Complainant specifically complained that her mother-in-law, father-in-law and sister-in-law, also misbehaved with her and she was not provided meals etc. As per complainant, she became pregnant but despite that petitioner kept on committing atrocities upon her and finally in August, 2004, she with her two months old pregnancy, was left in the house of her parents, by the mother-in-law, Smt. Kaulan Devi. Complainant while lodging report on 9.4.2015, also proclaimed that she was pregnant for the last nine months and during this period, nobody from her in-laws bothered to maintain her and as such sought action against her in-laws including her husband, in terms of Section 498A IPC.

3. Subsequently, on the basis of investigation carried out by the police, pursuant to registration of FIR, as referred above, and on the conclusion thereof, police presented challan in the competent court of law. Learned trial Court being satisfied that prima facie case exists against petitioner, proceeded to frame charge under Section 498A IPC against the petitioner as well as other family members of the petitioner, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Accused also got recorded their statements under Section 313 CrPC, wherein they denied the case of the prosecution in toto. However, the fact remains that the learned trial Court below, on the basis of material adduced on record by the prosecution held petitioner guilty of having committed offence punishable under Section 498A IPC and acquitted other co-accused.

4. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgment passed by learned trial Court, petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Jud