(Guest)

Whether `girl friend' would be a `relative of husband of a w

Whether `girl friend' would be a `relative of husband of a woman' in terms of Section 498A?

The core question which arises for consideration is as to whether the `girl friend' would be a `relative of husband of a woman' in terms of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
By no stretch of imagination a girl friend or even a concubine in an etymological sense would be a `relative'. The word `relative' brings within its purview a status. Such a status must be conferred either by blood or marriage or adoption. If no marriage has taken place, the question of one being relative of another would not arise.

We may notice that the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Rajeti Laxmi v. State of Andhra Pradesh, [ 1 (2007) DMC 797 ], held as under :-

"4. The entire reading of the charge-sheet and the statements of L.Ws. 1 to 7, goes to show that it is nobody's case of the accused or the prosecution that A-6 is the relative of husband of L.W. 1. She is only concubine of A-1 and having illicit intimacy with him. Therefore, in the absence of any averment in the charge-sheet or any statement that she is a relative of A1, I am of the opinion that the offence under Section 498A,IPC do not attract to A-6. Even as per the dictionary meaning "relative" means a person connected by blood or marriage or `a species' related to another by common origin". Simply because A-6 is having illicit intimacy with A-1, it cannot be said that she is a relative of A-1. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings in C.C. No.233 of 2004 for the offence under Section 498-A, IPC, against the petitioner,A-6. Insofar as the other offences are concerned, it may go on."

A learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, in Swapnaja v. State of Maharashtra and another, [ Criminal Application No.388 of 2008 decided on 21.4.2008 ], opined :-

"....Even assuming that due to her extramarital relation with husband of the respondent No.2, she is being ill-treated or subjected to harassment by her husband and his relatives, then also it is difficult to say that the applicant is accountable to answer the charge for offence punishable under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. For, she is not related to husband of the respondent No.2 nor can be regarded as the person, who can fall within explanation (a) or (b) of Section 498-A of the I.P.C."

To the similar effect is the law laid down by the same High Court in Ranjana Gopalrao Thorat v. State of Maharasthra,

[ 2007 CRI.L.J. 3866 ].

Supreme Court of India

U.Suvetha vs State By Insp.Of Police & Anr on 6 May, 2009

Bench: S.B. Sinha, R.M. Lodha

REPORTABLE