Mere inaction would not attract ingredients of section 498-A of Indian Penal Code.
Moreover, as regards the alleged harassment by accused no.3 Kaushalya, mother in law, he only stated that she was not giving food to victim and not beyond that. Moreover, it is bald statement made by PW 1 Uttamrao against accused no.3 which was allegedly disclosed by victim to him which is not being supported by any other oral/documentary evidence and, therefore, such bald statement cannot be believed. Apart from that, even assuming for the sake of assumption without admitting that victim was not given food, apparently, mere said inaction would not attract ingredients of section 498-A of Indian Penal Code.
https://www.lawweb.in/2013/11/mere-inaction-would-not-attract.html
Bombay High Court
Vitthalrao S/O Dattarao Kale vs The State Of Maharashtra At The on 10 October, 2012
Bench: Shrihari P. Davare
Citation; 2013 ALL M R (cri)1629
