The Patna High Court has ruled that merely referring to one's wife as 'Bhoot' (ghost) or 'Pisach' (Vampire) does not meet the threshold for constituting an act of cruelty.

Justice Bibek Chaudhuri's bench further elaborated that within matrimonial relationships, particularly those that have deteriorated, instances of mutual verbal abuse, including the use of derogatory language, are not uncommon. However, not all such exchanges can be categorized as constituting "cruelty."

The court made these remarks while overturning a husband's conviction under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act 1961. The Court granted the husband's revision petition, which contested the decision of the Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif, who had upheld the husband's conviction as ruled by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda.

In 1994, the father of the wife, identified as Opposite Party No. 2, lodged a complaint case with the Chief Judicial Magistrate in Nawada against her husband and other family members. The complaint alleged that following his daughter's marriage to the petitioner no. 2 (husband), she had endured both physical and mental abuse due to demands for dowry.

The complaint was forwarded to the Police under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). Subsequently, a case was registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 498A, 323, 120B, 348, and 386, as well as Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Following the investigation, the Police filed a charge sheet against the petitioners and 11 other individuals named in the First Information Report (FIR). Subsequently, both the Trial Court and the Court of Appeal found the petitioners guilty and sentenced them to one year of rigorous imprisonment for the offense under Section 498A IPC and six months of rigorous imprisonment for the offense punishable under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

In his appeal against the conviction, the husband approached the High Court, where his legal counsel contended that the complaint lacked specific details regarding who had demanded dowry, when such demands were made, and the nature of the alleged torture inflicted upon the wife.

Additionally, it was argued that the wife had never sought medical treatment for any alleged abuse inflicted upon her by the petitioner-husband. Conversely, the counsel representing the wife's father contended that the petitioner-husband and his family members subjected her to emotional cruelty by derogatorily referring to her as "Bhoot" (ghost) and "Pisach" (demon), which constituted severe psychological harm.

Initially, the Court dismissed the argument that merely labeling his wife as 'Bhoot' and 'Pishach' amounted to cruelty by the husband. Furthermore, the Court noted that although the wife claimed to have informed her father about the alleged torture through a series of letters, none of these letters were presented as evidence by the complainant during the trial.

Case title - SG and another vs State of Bihar and another