The Delhi High Court held that a woman’s act of crying, by itself, isn’t a strong condition to substantiate claims of dowry harassment. HC made this statement in response to a petition that challenged the legality of the discharge of a husband and his family from the alleged charges of dowry harassment and cruelty. 

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made this observation and dismissed the petitioners’ claims. 

Her relatives supported the prosecution’s statements by alleging that they hosted a wedding with expenses worth ₹4 lakhs. The woman’s husband and in-laws had subsequently made demands for a motorcycle, cash, and a gold bracelet. 

The woman was married into the family in December 2010 and the mother of two daughters passed away on 31 March, 2014.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna referred to the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and took note of the deceased’s sister’s recorded statement. The sister had mentioned she had called her sister during Holi and found her crying. The Judge clarified that the act of discovering someone in tears cannot be conclusive evidence for dowry harassment. 

The court observed the woman’s father failing to provide specific instances that sparked suspicion or provided crucial evidence that money was given to the accused. 

Justice Krishna even remarked, “Such vague and unsubstantiated claims do not even make out a prima facie case of harassment.”

The trial had already discharged the accused, citing that the woman died of a natural cause, which was pneumonia. 

The Delhi High Court pointed out the post-mortem report which confirmed pneumonia as the cause of death. The Court reinforced that in the absence of any link between the alleged cruelty and the woman’s death, Clause (a) of the Explanation to Section 498A IPC does not apply in this case.