Extramarital affairs brutally murder the trust of your partner because trust is the root of a relationship and if roots get damaged whole tree gets affected same is with a relationship that’s why it is treated as a offence under section 498A of IPC.
If an extramarital relationship of a man causes serious domestic discord between the married couple, the he can be convicted for causing mental cruelty to his wife under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to imprisonment, the judgement concluded by Madras High Court.
The Madras Court delivered very commendably, courageously and convincing judgement on the case titled Nakkeran Alias Jeoran Pandi vs state and anr. on 07.12.2021. This is the case where Nakkeran on the grounds of one of the apex court judgement of K.V. Prakash babu VS State of Karnataka (2016) which explains that solely because a person was involved in an extramarital relationship and there was suspicion in the mind of wife, it could not be regarded as mental cruelty to attract the offence of Abetment of suicide under 306 of the IPC.
In the same decision, the Apex Court of India said that mental cruelty depends upon the individual with their different perception of mind and their level of sensity. The court further states that mental cruelty is a social strata of people involved. So, this can not be generalized in this case but it can be appreciated.
The above Madras High Court judgement was passed by Justice D BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY while hearing the petition filed by Nakkeran Alias Jeoran Pandi’s conviction by a trial court in Tiruvannamalai district in November 2011. It is to be mentioned about the petition that criminal revision petition is filed under section 397 revised with 401 of Criminal procedure code to set aside the judgement made in session judge, Tiruvannamalai dated 30.01.2014 confirming the judgement made in C.C.NO. 373 of 2007 on the file of the judicial Magistrate court, Arani, dated 25.11.2011.
To put the thing in right perspective, let’s understand the case on 17.02.2006, P.W.1/Thamarai Selvi lodged a complaint against EX. P2 that she got married with the petitioner on 02.03.2000 and after the marriage her husband was not maintaining a proper relationship with her and he also used to hit her, does not treat her well and even used to abuse her physically. Along with this she added that he also attempted bigamy by marrying Datchayani. This was the complaint through which case started.
Then, the learned Judicial magistrate proceeded to hear the case and by the judgment dated 25.11.2011 it was clear that there was a valid marriage between the petitioner and PW1(wife). After conveying the evidence it was observed that they both got married, then the petitioner/first accused started torturing her and after getting her salary, the first accused used to ask more money for him from her parents and was also harassing her by demanding dowry after marriage. So this was found that PW1(wife) was a victim of cruelty by the first accused. After hearing the case the trial court passed a judgment which sentenced the first accused 2 years of imprisonment with a fine of Rs.3000 under the offence of section 498A of Indian penal code and acquitted other accused 2 to 5 in the offence of 406, 494 and 506.
After this judgment, the petitioner now filed the same case at learned session court, Tiruvannamalai in 2011. The judgment got declared on date 30.01.2014 . further considering all the evidence on records, the session court held that even A2 TO A5 are liable to be punished but the prosecution has not filed any cross-appeal. Therefore , the session court confirmed the conviction as well as punishment against the petitioner. Now this criminal revision is laid before the madras high court.
As it turned out before Madras high court , the bench observed that there were three sets of allegations as per learned counsel of petitioner Mr. B.M. Subhash that are recorded to drive home the charges of cruelty. First P.W.1(wife) said that she had been tortured by the petitioner and has been subjected to physical cruelty in the year between 2000 to 2005 but she herself in a legal notice has said that she and her husband were happily living between 2000 to 2005. The second loop of allegation was the specific incident that took place on 16.11.2005 but upon cross-examination she herself went back that the incident of 16.11.2005 didn’t happen. Now, the third and last allegation which was of mental cruelty on P.W.1 on the account of extramarital relationship. The counsel holds the point that this will not amount to mental cruelty so as to constitute offence under section 498A of IPC. So, according to counsel there was a grave error by both the courts and adds that same is bad in law.
The bench after hearing the doubts on the allegation states that according to first allegation the P.W.1(wife) said that she was tortured by the accused but she specifically avered that P.W.1 and the accused were living happily during 2000 – 2005, it throws doubt on the allegation leveled.
Secondly, the court was also in agreement with learned counsel for the petitioner that as the alleged has categorically admitted in her cross-examination that the incident on 16.11.2005 did not happen.
But apart from these two allegations, the accused was having an extramarital relationship with Datchayani, who was also prosecuted as accused/A6 for the offense under section 494 of IPC. In this regard the evidence can not be overlooked as the birth of child of first accused and Datchayani was observed by the birth certificate with birth date of child on 17.09.2006 itself.
Therefore, the court cannot close its eyes to the hard evidence and the facts of this case. Hence, the court holds that the petitioner was having an extramarital relationship with Datchayani which caused mental cruelty and trauma over P.W.1 due to which she has to leave her matrimonial home and would amount to cruelty to her within section 498A of IPC.
In addition to this, there is no fault by the trial court and lower appellate court that the petitioner was guilty and considering the facts and circumstances of case, the High Court of Madras modified the sentence of imprisonment alone imposed on the accused it as rigorous imprisonment of six months from that of two years.
Summing up as this is a very courageous and good judgment by Madras High Court which displays zero tolerance for cruelty toward wife by the husband. This judgment makes clear that no man can suppress any women if he does he can be jailed or punished or both.
As there is one great saying that CHEATING ON YOUR SPOUSE IS ONE OF THE LOWEST OF ACT ONE CAN INDULGE IN. NO ONE DESERVES TO BE CHEATED ON , NOT EMOTIONALLY AND NOT PHYSICALLY which is gratefully proved by this recent judgment of Madras High Court.