The National Commission for Women (NCW) wants the Supreme Court to rule on whether a woman can be held liable for cruelty under dowry law if she threatens to “force” her son to take divorce.
“Whether threatening a daughter-in-law that she (the mother-in-law) would force the son to take a divorce not amount to mental cruelty thereby clearly attracting Section 498A (dowry harassment) of the IPC?” the commission has sought a judicial clarification from the apex court.
It has further asked the court to decide if “advising” a daughter-in-law to take divorce by mutual consent and inducing her with a monetary compensation amounts to cruelty as defined under Section 498A.
The top women’s body has sought these clarifications in a curative petition filed before a Bench headed by Justice P Sathasivam against a July 27, 2009 Supreme Court judgment.
The commission said it had, during the “course of its work”, found dowry harassment and domestic violence “more of a norm than an aberration and the law has to be interpreted in a manner beneficial to women in distress”.
The 2009 judgment of Justices S B Sinha and Cyriac Joseph had quashed dowry harassment charges instituted against Bhaskar Lal Sharma and his wife by their daughter-in-law, Monica, who accused them of physically harming her and threatening her with divorce.
Section 498A says it amounts to ‘cruelty’ if a husband or his relative wilfully subjects a woman to actions that may drive her to commit suicide or cause grave injury to herself. A person is liable to undergo a maximum imprisonment of three years if found guilty.
The petition asks the court whether “constantly interfering in the marriage of a newly married couple by advising a daughter-in-law to give divorce, kick her, and criticise her on a regular basis” match the definition of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC.
Source IE
No comments:
Post a Comment