‘Humiliation, mental cruelty drove woman to take her life’: Court refuses to quash ‘dowry death’ case

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a ‘dowry death’ case against a man and his parents, noting allegations that when the victim complained to her in-laws about the difficulties she was facing in her marriage, she was met with ridicule rather than support and was reportedly told that she did not deserve to live, before she took the extreme step.

Justice M Nagaprasanna was hearing petitions filed by the husband and his family members seeking quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) and subsequent criminal proceedings arising from the woman’s death.

“It is further alleged that when the deceased disclosed these acts of cruelty to her in-laws, rather than receiving solace or support, she was subjected to humiliation and derision, and was allegedly told that ‘persons like her ought not to live’. According to the complainant, these acts of humiliation and mental cruelty became the immediate precipitating factors that drove the deceased to take the extreme step of ending her life,” the June 4 order read.

Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that the victim’s father had admitted that despite her complaints, he advised her to reconcile with her husband and continue the marriage.

‘Unbearable mental agony’

The high court noted that the chargesheet depicted a pattern of alleged dowry demands, emotional cruelty and repeated accusations regarding the victim’s character, coupled with matrimonial discord that allegedly pushed her into a state of severe mental distress.

The court also noted that the victim’s father had admitted that despite her complaints, he advised her to reconcile with her husband and continue the marriage, apparently out of concern for societal expectations and family honour.

Referring to the period the couple spent in the United States, the court observed that the victim was far away from the support and protection of her parental home when the marital relationship allegedly began to deteriorate.

According to the allegations, what initially appeared to be marital incompatibility gradually escalated into persistent discord and near-daily quarrels between the spouses.

Rejecting the argument that no overt act had occurred “soon before death”, the court held that the expression cannot be interpreted through a rigid or straitjacket formula and must depend on the facts of each case.

The court further observed that if the prosecution found material evidence against the victim’s father, it would remain open to proceed against him in accordance with the law.

Accordingly, the high court dismissed the petitions filed by the husband and his family members, while leaving open to them all remedies available under the law.

6 months of marriage, death, last note

It was placed on record that the victim got married to her husband in November 2024. After a few days of marriage, the husband departed for the United States in pursuit of his avocation, while the bride remained in India, awaiting the commencement of conjugal companionship.

It was further added that nearly three months after the marriage, in February 2025, the victim journeyed to the US to join her husband. However, it was alleged that within two months, she returned to her parental home in Bengaluru, alleging cruelty at the hands of her husband.

Later, the husband’s family are said to have visited the residence of the victim’s father to bring about a reconciliation between the spouses.

A day after the visit of the in-laws, in April 2025, the victim was alleged to have authored a death note and ended her own life. Her father then lodged a complaint alleging cruelty, dowry death at the hands of his son-in-law and his family.

Story continues below this ad

During the subsistence of the trial, it transpired that the victim’s father and the family members entered into a settlement with the accused and sought to place it before this court, seeking a quashment of the proceedings on account of the settlement.

However, since the offence is dowry death and the death having happened within five months of marriage, the court refused closure of the proceedings on acceptance of the settlement.

Father rebuked daughter before incident

Appearing for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Hashmath Pasha argued that there was no demand or acceptance of dowry, either at the time of marriage or before the marriage.

Story continues below this ad

He added that there was no cruelty in connection with the demand of dowry before the death of the victim.

He claimed that the marital discord between the husband and the wife and the resultant death of the woman cannot become the ingredients under sections 80 or 85 of the BNS (dowry death, cruelty by husband, family), unless the demand of dowry is attached to it.

It was further contended that just before the fateful day, the victim’s father is said to have rebuked her daughter and alleged that she was characterless. He emphasised that, therefore, no blame can be laid against the present accused.

Story continues below this ad

Victim met with cruelty

Additional Special Public Prosecutor B N Jagadeesha opposed the closure of the proceedings by way of recording of the settlement.

It was his submission that the conversations between the victim and other people would clearly project the cruelty meted out by the husband.

It was further added that the last note was clear that the husband had put a surveillance on the wife in the United States as to whom she would meet, whom she would talk to and based on that material, the victim was alleged to have had an illicit relationship with unknown persons, and therefore, when her character was questioned, it was the proximate reason for her death.