498A is not a catch-all term that can be attracted by anything that wife dislikes
General acts of cruelty do not attract 498A. The cruelty must be to such an extent that it can cause loss of life or limb or push wife to commit suicide. Or it needs to be proven that the acts of cruelty were willfull and made in connection with non-fulfillment of a dowry demand.
Judges have taken this definition very strictly. Reading verdicts from trial courts in 498A cases is very illuminating to understand the currently accepted definition of cruelty under 498A. Below are some example arguments that judges have made in real cases to dismiss certain allegations of cruelty.
Acts of cruelty proven after the dowry demand was fulfilled do not fall in the scope of 498A. If the dowry demand was fulfilled no question arises of future acts of cruelty connected to that demand unless a new demand for more dowry can be proven.
Few instances over couple of years of mental cruelty cannot be brought under purview of 498A. Mental cruelty has to be sustained continously over period of time in order to be considered severe so as to push woman towards suicide. Short marriages of 1 week or 2 weeks without any proof of physical cruelty and mere claims of severe mental creulty have been demolished by courts several times.
Demands for monetary contribution towards home expenses from wife's salary or from inlaws for purpose of dire needs like medical expenses etc. have also been discarded from definition of "dowry" demand. Dowry demands are only such that they are connected with the marriage.
Mental cruelty is weighed together with socio economic status of wife. Harsh words said to a woman who has little exposure to the world outside her home can be seen as cruelty. Similar words said to a woman who is educated and works in professional disciplines cannot be called cruelty.
Husband saying something but wife interpreting it in a different way which causes her agony is not cruelty. Prosecution has to prove beyond doubt that the act was willful and intentional. Also if he says something in anger because of something that is unconnected with dowry demands also cannot be covered under 498A.
I am surprised when legal professionals throw out 498A for everything under the sun. This is a very narrowly defined law covering very specific incidents that need to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
