It is increasingly evident, mere fact of an “illicit affair” is not “cruelty” within the meaning of the first limb of Section 498A of The Indian Penal Code, 1860. While discussing Alienation of Affection Tort Actions, I had mentioned Pinakin Rawal v. State of Gujarat, (2013) 10 SCC 48, a lesser known Judgment authored by PETA Man of the Year 2014, Hon’ble Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan. Following Pinakin, in Ghusabhai Raisangbhai Chorasiya v. State of Gujarat, [Criminal Appeal No. 262 of 2009] it has been reiterated, though an extra-marital relationship may be “illegal and immoral”, in absence of some “other acceptable evidence on record” that can establish such “high degree of mental cruelty”, the Explanation to Section 498A which includes cruelty to drive a woman to commit suicide would not be attracted. Ghusabhai & Pinakin heralds novel jurisprudence that is favourable to men and their habits. We still wait though for the one woman, who instead of committing suicide, will file an Alienation of Affection Tort Action. The results shall be markedly different.

_____

In recent years, as there have been a notable rise in matrimonial disputes, accompanied by growing discord and tension, consequently, there has been a growing tendency to misuse provisions like Section 498A, IPC for unleashing personal vendetta.

– Hon’ble Justice B.V. Nagarathna, Dara Lakshmi Narayana v. State of Telangana, [Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.16239 of 2024] decided on 10.12.2024. 

Also see, Shobhit Kumar Mittal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 4069 of 2024] decided on 24.09.2025.

_____

Notwithstanding possibility of truth behind allegations of cruelty, growing tendency to misuse legal provisions has time and again been condemned by this Court [Dara Lakshmi Narayana v. State of Telangana, 2024 INSC 953; Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, (2010) 7 SCC 667].

– Hon’ble Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, Ghanshyam Soni v. State, [Criminal Appeal No. 2894 of 2025] decided on 04.06.2025.