The recent spine-chilling case of the suicide of a 34 year old techie in Bangalore, has sent shockwaves around the country and has raised questions regarding the misuse of the provision in the erstwhile Indian Penal Code, which was meant to protect married woman from being subjected to cruelty, but in recent times, there has been a growing trend regarding the weaponization if this provision to make it a tool to extort either a settlement amount or to get a hefty amount of alimony. In this article, we are going to delve into Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and its overarching misuse, which has even been noted by courts in recent times.
Section 498(A) of Indian Penal Code deals with the cruelty subjected to a woman by her husband or by the family members of the husband.
Section 498(A) lays down the section as – Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.—for the purposes of this section, “cruelty means”—
(a) Any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
From a bare perusal of the provision, it is understood that if a husband or a relative of the husband, subjects his wife to cruelty, then such person can be punished with imprisonment for a time upto 3 years and will also be liable to pay a fine. Cruelty under this provision has been defined as any such act which might be either mental or physical, which is likely to cause a woman to commit suicide or to cause a grave injury to danger to her life, or a form of cruelty where the woman is harassed with the view to coerce her or her family members to meet any illegal demand for any property or any valuable security. Therefore, it can be said that the provision defines cruelty as any such act that abets a woman to harm herself or put her life in danger, or any such act committed against a woman to extort or coerce some valuable property or security from her or any of her family members.
The misuse of Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, has become a growing trend where the initial intention of the provision to safeguard women from cruelty and harassment, has become a tool for exploitation by some individuals to falsely accuse their husbands of cruelty under the said section, and to extract financial gain.
The abuse of this section, has led to a disproportionate number of acquittals, as compared to convictions, resulting in an inevitable undermining of the credibility of the law. The Supreme Court, which had upheld Section 498Aof the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as a protective measure for women in past judgements, has been forced to acknowledge its potential misuse, and characterizing it as “legal terrorism”. The presence of widespread complaints against its misuse and a further judicial recognition of the misuse is there, but empirical data on the extent of the problem remains scarce, and its potential as a tool for exploitation is seen when cases like the one we are presently seeing, crop up. Nevertheless, due to such widespread misuse, a perception about the provision being an “anti-male law”, has been created.
There have been several observations made by the Supreme Court, in cases over the past few years, where the Supreme Court has noticed the growing trend of misuse of this provisions, as such, we are going to delve into some case laws regarding this subject.
In this case, the Supreme Court bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice N Kotiswar Singh have expressed their concern over the rampant misuse of this section. The honourable bench has highlighted the ever growing trend to use this provision as a tool for personal vendetta in matrimonial disputes. The bench noted that the rise in marital discord across the country is directly related to the increase of the misuse of this provision. Their judgement further emphasized that if vague and generalized allegations in matrimonial conflicts are not carefully examined, then it could result in the abuse of the legal processes, which will encourage coercive tactics by the wife or her family.
The observations were made by the court, while hearing a petition filed by a husband and his family, wherein they challenged the Telangana High Court’s refusal to quash criminal proceedings initiated against them. The case had been filed by the wife after the husband had sought the dissolution of their marriage. The court thus deemed it fit to quash cases of cruelty and dowry, which were lodged by the wife against her husband and in-laws. The court therefore came to the conclusion, that the wife had filed the complaint in order to settle personal scores and was thus misusing provisions intended to protect women under the provision.
Although, the court clarified, that its observations in the present case should not discourage genuine victims of cruelty from seeking the legal recourse which the provision intends to provide. The court put a further emphasis while quashing the case, that cases like the one in question, where a complaint under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is lodged as a counter measure against a divorce petition, should not be encouraged at all.
In this case, the court cautioned against the increasing misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, wherein the court observed that exaggerated versions of incidents are getting reflected in numerous complaints on this provision, and a tendency of over- implication is evident in significant number of cases emerging from this section.
In the mentioned case, the Supreme Court adopted a resolute position against the wrongful arrest and detention of individuals which often takes place, based on complaint made under this section. The court further emphasized that arrests made in such cases should not be carried out automatically, but must be preceded by a comprehensive investigation, which can safeguard innocent individuals from getting unwarranted harassment under this provision.
In the mentioned case, the court had proposed the establishment of Family Welfare Committees, which would review complaints prior to any police action based on a complaint received under this section, and which will reflect the commitment of judiciary to curb the misuse of the provision. The court focused on minimizing the filing of false cases under the pretext of dowry or cruelty under this section.
In this case, the Supreme Court issued a series of guidelines to ensure procedural fairness in cases which involved offences punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. These directives included requiring police officers to provide written justification before making an arrest, issuing proper notices before summoning suspects for questioning and mandating the automatic grant of bail if the accused was not arrested during the investigation, adopting a lenient approach in cases involving women and vulnerable individuals, and ensuring the timely disposal of bail applications by a minimum of two weeks and of anticipatory bail applications by a minimum of six weeks.
Among several cases and observations made by courts and honourable judges in recent years, these few stand out as laying grounds for some sort of safeguards against the potential misuse of the Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, wherein the court had on several occasions noticed the growing trend of putting husbands behind bars, without a scope of availing bail, without proper investigation, based on a complaint lodged on Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The ever important question persists, that what should be possible solution relating to this ever increasing misuse of this provision. Firstly one of the first steps that need to be undertaken is the speedy disposal of cases, the trial of criminal cases, particularly those of a serious nature, often extends for 8 to 10 years or longer, depending on the severity of the crime. However, a swift trial is crucial to ensure that innocent victims accused under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, receive timely justice. Therefore, it is imperative for the judiciary to not only ensure effectiveness but also prioritize expediting the trial process in cases under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Secondly, a sincere effort must be made to ensure that cases under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, are treated as bailable offences rather than non-bailable. This approach would help prevent the unjust detention of innocent individuals. Thirdly, the Court should consider imposing penalties and taking stringent actions against individuals making false accusations. Introducing a deterrent element is crucial, as the absence of such measures has contributed to the alarming rise in cases under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
As such, to curb this growing evil of rise in the number of cases where this provision has been used as means of legal extortion, and to prevent from another person meeting the tragic end as the 34 year old Atul Subhash, courts in our country have to take a proactive role to end the menace caused by this potent misuse of the provision.
As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, law firms are not permitted to solicit work and advertise. By clicking the “Agree” button and accessing this website (www.daslegal.co.in) the user fully accepts that you are seeking information of your own accord and volition and that no form of solicitation has taken place by the Firm or its members.
The information provided under this website is solely available at your request for information purposes only. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertisement. The firm is not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material / information provided under this website. In cases where the user has any legal issues, he/she in all cases must seek independent legal advice.