Who doesn’t like fries, but is that enough to sue someone legally? Apparently yes! In a bizarre incident in Bengaluru, a woman made cruelty allegations against her US-based husband for allegedly forbidding her from eating fries.
Fortunately, the Karnataka High Court has temporarily stayed the investigation and granted the husband’s request to return to the United States.
According to a Times of India According to reports, the wife, whose identity is unknown, filed a complaint under sections 498A and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Dowry Prohibition Act. Following this, the police issued a wanted notice (LOC) against the man, preventing him from returning to the United States for work purposes.
In an order issued on Thursday, Justice M. Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court allowed the husband’s request to return to the US and stayed the travel ban until the next hearing on September 21. After considering his affidavit, the judge also allowed the husband to leave the country.
In the affidavit, the husband assured his availability for future investigations.
According to the TOI According to the report, the woman claimed that after her birth, which was complicated by high blood pressure, her husband restricted her consumption of French fries, rice and meat because he feared weight gain. In response, the man claimed that he took over all the housework and daily duties, while his wife devoted much of her time to watching television and talking on the phone.
In his verdict, Justice Nagaprasanna observed that the complaint failed to establish any act of cruelty under Section 498A of the IPC. He further stressed that continuing the investigation would amount to misuse of the judicial system.
The judge then ordered the police to inform immigration authorities about the travel plans and to ensure that the husband was not subject to any travel restrictions.
“It is quite surprising how the police concerned has used its power to obtain a LOC in the trivial circumstances mentioned above. This is not an exercise of power by the police but an abuse of power at the behest of the complainant,” Justice Nagaprasanna was quoted as saying by TOI.
“Issuing a LOC is not a crime. The plaintiff’s sole objective appears to be to prevent the applicant from returning to his place of work in the United States,” he added.
