The Karnataka High Court has ruled that a husband’s girlfriend cannot be prosecuted for the offence of cruelty against his wife under Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), as she does not fall within the law’s definition of a “relative” of the husband.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the order while considering a petition filed by a woman who had been made an accused in criminal proceedings initiated following a matrimonial dispute. The petitioner was described in the proceedings as the paramour of the husband.
Editorial Insight
Key Highlights
Important points readers should notice.
Issue/Event: Karnataka High Court ruling on applicability of Section 85 BNS
Location: Karnataka
Authority/Organisation: Karnataka High Court
Action Taken: Criminal proceedings against the husband’s alleged paramour were quashed
Impact: The ruling clarifies that a husband’s girlfriend cannot be treated as his “relative” for prosecution under Section 85 BNS
The case included allegations of cruelty, assault or use of criminal force, intentional insult and criminal intimidation under the BNS, along with an allegation under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The woman approached the High Court seeking quashing of the proceedings against her.
The High Court relied on an earlier Supreme Court ruling in Dechamma IM @ Dechamma Koushik v. State of Karnataka, which held that a girlfriend of a married man cannot be construed as his relative for the purpose of the relevant cruelty provision.
Section 85 of the BNS applies to a husband or a relative of the husband who subjects a woman to cruelty. The provision carries a maximum punishment of three years’ imprisonment and fine.
Editorial Analysis
Why This Matters
The ruling provides an important judicial interpretation of Section 85 of the BNS and the scope of the term “relative” in cruelty cases. It also reinforces the relevance of Supreme Court precedent when courts assess whether persons other than a husband or his relatives can be prosecuted under the provision. For matrimonial cases, the distinction is significant because criminal liability under Section 85 is specifically connected to the categories identified in the statutory provision.
Based on the Supreme Court precedent and the facts before it, the Karnataka High Court held that the woman could not be treated as a relative of the husband and quashed the criminal proceedings against her.
