The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in a significant judgment, clarified that a husband's act of forcefully engaging in unnatural sex with his wife against her will and assaulting her for resisting constitutes cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The ruling came from Justice G.S. Ahluwalia on May 9, 2025, while hearing a plea under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which sought to quash an FIR registered against the husband under Sections 377, 323, and 498A of the IPC.
The complainant, the wife, alleged that she was married to the applicant on May 2, 2023, according to Hindu customs. Following their marriage, the husband allegedly started committing unnatural sexual acts with her after consuming alcohol. Whenever she refused, he reportedly assaulted her and subjected her to repeated acts of cruelty. Despite approaching the Mahila Paramarsh Kendra multiple times and the police summoning the husband, he continued his abusive conduct.
“Committing unnatural sex with wife against her wishes and on her resistance, assaulting and treating her with physical cruelty will certainly fall within the definition of cruelty.” — Justice G.S. Ahluwalia
Read Also:- MP High Court Upholds CEO’s Authority to Withdraw Sarpanch’s Financial Powers in Corruption Case
The husband's counsel relied on a previous High Court ruling in Manish Sahu vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, which clarified that non-consensual unnatural sex between a husband and wife is not considered rape under Section 375 IPC, provided the wife is not below fifteen years of age. Thus, it was argued that if the act isn’t rape or an offence under Section 377 IPC, then Section 498A should also not apply.
However, Justice Ahluwalia observed that the absence of consent in unnatural acts does not lose its significance when coupled with physical abuse. Referring to the legal explanation of cruelty under Section 498A, the Court emphasized that:
“Any wilful conduct which is likely to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb, or health—whether mental or physical—amounts to cruelty.”
The Court concluded that repeated assaults on the wife whenever she resisted unnatural sex clearly falls under the scope of cruelty. The Judge highlighted that dowry demand is not a prerequisite to establish cruelty under Section 498A.
While the FIR was quashed with respect to the offence under Section 377 IPC, the High Court upheld the charges under Sections 498A and 323 IPC.
Case title: BJ Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
