Today’s article is about legal results and reality in cases of dowry or women abuse by wife after divorce. In case of marital discord with the husband, the wife files a case against the husband and his family members under Section 3 of the Dowry Prevention Act, 2018. Another is the case under section 11(c) of the Prevention of Torture against Women and Children Act-2000.
The essence of the definition of these loans is that if a woman’s husband or husband’s father, mother, guardian, relative or any other person on behalf of the husband creates pressure or tortures for dowry, then there is a case in these loans. Many times it is seen that the wife goes to her father’s house due to marital discord. The husband has repeatedly failed to fetch. Then the husband divorced at some point. After receiving the divorce notice, the wife takes revenge and goes to the police station or court to file such false dowry case.
Section 3 of the Dowry Prevention Act states that if the wife’s complaint is proved, she will be punished with imprisonment not exceeding 5 (five) years but not less than 1 (one) year or fine not exceeding 50,000 (fifty thousand) or both. Section 11(c) of the Prevention of Torture against Women and Children Act-2000 states that the punishment shall be three years but not less than one year rigorous imprisonment and shall also be punished with fine in addition to that sentence.
In this case, when the accused was arrested or after receiving the summons, the accused submitted to the learned court that after receiving the notice of divorce, Badini was angry and revengeful towards the accused and filed a false harassment case. In support of this statement, the learned court has presented appropriate evidence including notice of divorce, postal receipt, acknowledgment of receipt in the form of an application.
The learned Court considered the totality and based on the decision of the High Court in the post-talaq case, granted bail to the accused. Then the next stage of the case is about framing the complaint under the relevant section. During the hearing on the framing of charges, the learned counsel for the accused submitted an application to the judge for exemption. He argued that if the case is filed after the divorce, then the case will stand still and the accused will be acquitted.
His Excellency presented a decision of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in this regard – which was Roshan Ara Begum Vs. Mizanur Rahman and others, High Court Division, 12 ADC, Page-96 and Rashtra Vs. Rafizul Haque, 6 ALR (ed), vol-2, pg-90. The Hon’ble High Court observed in this case that the divorce took place earlier. Therefore, on the day of the cause of action, the victim is not supposed to be at her husband’s house.
But in this case, the Tribunal rejected the application made by the accused under section 265(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and filed a charge against the accused. The accused filed a revision against that order in the Hon’ble High Court. His Excellency High Court dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused. Then the plaintiff (State) went to the Appellate Division against the said order of the Hon’ble High Court. The Appellate Division after a thorough consideration of the evidence and facts decided that the order of the High Court acquitting the accused husband was correct. So, if there is no relationship between the husband and the wife, it becomes difficult for the plaintiff to prove the result of the case of false dowry by the wife after divorcing the wife according to the correct rules.
So if you are a victim of a false case by your wife, then fight the case with due respect to the law and the court. Try to collect the copy of declaration. If it happens that you did not know and suddenly the police came and arrested you and took you to the police station, then you will be sent to the court within 24 hours of the arrest. Then you have to apply for bail through your lawyer.
If the documents and evidence are correct, false cases will be avoided. Running away from the case is not wise. It can be executed in your absence.
The case study related to the case after divorce is as follows: The plaintiff filed the case in the learned Tribunal on 11/09/2021 after showing cause of action on 5/09/2009. Meanwhile, the husband divorced his wife on 19/01/2009, about 8 months before filing the case. Divorce is also effective as per the law. His Highness High Court observes that the divorce took place earlier. Therefore, on the day of the cause of action, the victim is not supposed to be at her husband’s house. But the Tribunal dismissed the plea seeking order of discharge under Section 265(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and framed the charge against the accused. The accused filed a revision against that order in the Hon’ble High Court. His Excellency High Court dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused. Then the plaintiff (State) went to the Appellate Division against the said order of the Hon’ble High Court. The Appellate Division after a thorough consideration of the evidence and facts decided that the order of the High Court acquitting the accused husband was correct. (Roshan Ara Begum v. Md. Mizanur Rahman and others, High Court Division, 12 ADC, page-96 and Rashtra v. Md. Rafizul Haque, 6 ALR (AD), Vol-2, page-90).
According to another case study, on February 18, 2004, Shafiqur Rahman got married to a woman named Salma Sultana. On November 16, 2009, Salma filed a case against her husband under Section 4 of the Dowry Prevention Act in the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court of Dhaka. The plaintiff in the case stated that Salma realized that her husband was mentally ill and depressed after a few days of marriage. She (Salma) informed her in-laws and asked them to arrange treatment.
But Shafiqur said, he is neither sick nor depressed. Salma thinks her husband is greedy. That’s why he asked him (Salma) five lakh taka talking about business. He was physically and mentally abused because he refused to bring the money from his father’s house. At one point, Salma went to her father’s house. Shafikur brought him back after a few days. But his (Shafiqur) nature does not change. On May 20, 2009, he again pressed to bring five lakh taka. Now Shafikur said, he wants to buy a flat in Dhaka. Salma again refused to bring the money. He was tortured. Salma was forced to leave her husband’s house and go to her father’s house.
Last, on November 14, 2009, Shafikur went to Salma’s father’s house and demanded the same amount of money. He threatened to sever his relationship with his wife if he did not pay the money. Later Salma was forced to file a case against him (Shafiq). The lower court took cognizance of the case against Shafiqur. Later, when the case was transferred to Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate-18 for trial, the judge framed charges against the accused Shafikur.
Shafiqur filed a criminal mistrial case in the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings on the ground that it was illegal to frame the charges against him. After the preliminary hearing, the High Court issued a ruling as to why the proceedings of the case should not be declared cancelled. After hearing that rule, the court gave its verdict. The court said in its verdict, the law is clear that if money is demanded at the time of marriage or at any time before or after the marriage, it will be considered as dowry. (NM Shafiqur Rahman v. State, 7 ALR, page 313).
Author: Bangladesh Supreme Court Lawyer, Legal Author.
Email: [email protected]