Domestic quarrels or scolding for trivial matters, without evidence of persistent cruelty or dowry-related harassment, do not satisfy the legal definition of 'cruelty' under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

JUDGMENT

C.A.V. on 17.06.2026 Pronounced on 30/06/2026

1. I have already heard the arguments of Mr. Om Prakash, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Tarun Kumar, learned A.P.P. for State.

2. The instant criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.05.2005, passed by learned 4th Additional District & Sessions Judge, (F.T.C.), Dumka, in Sessions Case No. 80/2003 & 359/2003, arising out of Jama P.S. Case No. 8/2001, G.R. Case No. 64 of 2001, whereby and whereunder the appellant was charged for the offence under Sections 306 & 498A of the I.P.C. and after conclusion of trial acquitted from the charge under Section 306 of the I.P.C. and convicted for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. directing him to undergo R.I. for 3 years along with fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.

Factual Matrix

3. Factual matrix giving rise to this appeal is that, on 20.01.2001, the informant’s mother-in-law brought some treacle (गुड़ का शीरा) from the market and kept on some place of height of the wall (धरवा). The informant removed the treacle pot from the height of the wall and kept the same on the ground. Upon this, mother-in-law of the informant started abusing her. It is alleged that informant enraged due to rude behavior of her mother-in-law and took out fire from mud stove burning in the courtyard and put on herself, causing severe burn injuries. The informant Permila Devi was brought to Sadar Hospital, Dumka, where her treatment was going on. It is further alleged that her marriage was solemnized about seven years ago, she has been blessed with a girl child, who is about two and half years old. It is also alleged that from the very inception of marriage her mother-in-law is subjecting her to cruelty. The police approached at the hospital and her fardbeyan was recorded by S.I., Shiv Kr. Singh, on 22.01.2001 at about 11:00 A.M. at Female Ward, Bed No. V/6. Accordingly, F.I.R. was registered for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. against Lakhi Devi (mother-in-law of the informant).

4. In the course of investigation, the informant died during treatment, hence, offence under Section 306 of the I.P.C. was also added and charge-sheet was submitted there under.

5. After taking cognizance, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, where Sessions Case No. 80/2003 & 359/2003 was registered. The accused denied from the charges levelled against her and claimed to be tried.

6. In the course of trial, altogether 11 witnesses were examined by prosecution, apart from documentary evidence.

7. On the other hand, the case of defence is denial from occurrence and false implication, merely, because some scolding on misconduct of the deceased by the appellant.

8. The learned Trial Court after evaluating the evidence available on record held the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and sentenced as stated above.

Submissions on behalf of appellant: -

9. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is simple allegation against the appellant that she scolded her daughter-in-law for scattering the treacle pot on earth removing from (धरवा) at a height on the wall. The act and conduct of the deceased shown in repercussion is very violent and suggests her a lady of short temperament. It is further submitted that such type of trivial issues frequently take place in village life and ordinarily sustained and endured. The conduct of deceased in self-immolation on such a trivial issue does not warrant invoking the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. or any type of offence punishable under law rather such occurrences are ordinary wear and tear of life and no Court should take cognizance of such trivial matters, but surprisingly the appellant being mother-in-law of the deceased has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. In spite of fact that there is no allegation that the appellant put fire on deceased or committed