Misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) took center stage in a contentious ruling by the Supreme Court of India in X v. Telangana State and Another (2024 INSC 953), delivered at the year’s end. The judgment sparked debate with its observations, suggesting that some women exploit this provision as a tool for personal vendetta against their husbands and their families.
NEW DELHI : Justices B. Nagarathna and Kotiswar Singh, in a recent judgement highlighted a “growing tendency” of women allegedly exploiting this legal provision, designed to protect against them cruelty in marriage, for personal grudges against their husbands and in-laws.
While the bench stressed that women who endure genuine cruelty should not remain silent, the observations made by the bench , lead to two-way approach of the provision 498A which means , preventing the misuse and also , giving effect to the women who are actually suffering.
In this case, a woman lodged an FIR in February 2022 alleging cruelty under Section 498A and dowry harassment under the Dowry Prohibition Act, naming her husband and six of his family members. Although the High Court denied the husband’s plea to quash the FIR, it restricted arrests until the charge sheet was filed, following the guidelines established in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
However, the Supreme Court quashed the FIR against the husband and his in-laws, citing vague and unsubstantiated allegations in the complaint.
Similarly , the recent tragic suicide of a Bengaluru-based engineer and thereafter a similar case in Delhi , have been both linked to false allegations by the wife and their family , these rising suicides , in such false cases and harassment of the husbands have raised and highlighted pressing concerns regarding the functioning of India’s legal system and its misuse.
What we must think and imbibe is that at the outset, all laws have the potential to be ‘misused’ and no legal system is infallible. Similarly, the vast majority of crimes in India do not end with a conviction, and that does not mean they were all false/fake cases or that the person filing the complaint wanted to misuse the law.
In order to address the misuse of law ,there are a number of issues that must be worked upon at the deeper level:
Acknowledging Misuse of Laws: It is essential to recognize that all laws have the potential to be misused, as no legal system is perfect or immune to flaws.
Low Conviction Rates Do Not Equate to False Cases: The majority of crimes in India do not result in convictions, but this does not imply that all such cases were fabricated or filed with malicious intent.
Structural Issues Behind Low Convictions: Several studies point to systemic issues contributing to low conviction rates, such as:
- Inadequate access to quality legal aid.
- Witnesses turning hostile.
- Familial and societal pressures, particularly on women and children, to withdraw cases.
- Deficient or flawed police investigations.
Unaddressed Factors in NCRB Data: The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), India’s primary crime database, does not account for these structural reasons behind low conviction rates.
Methodological Flaws in NCRB Data: The NCRB data contains errors that can be exploited to perpetuate narratives about the misuse of laws, particularly those meant to protect women from domestic violence.
READ ALSO: “Domestic Violence & Section 498A IPC are the Most Abused Provisions”: Supreme Court
In the present case, the Supreme Court’s approach seems to shift the burden onto the victim, implying she must ensure her complaint is detailed and precise—an unrealistic expectation in a system often hostile to her.
This is particularly troubling as decades of research reveals that vague or broad allegations in FIRs often result from police inefficiency rather than any deliberate intent by the victim. Women frequently encounter insensitivity at police stations, where their complaints are either outright dismissed or carelessly documented.
Instead of addressing police accountability for poorly recorded statements, the focus appears to be misplaced, further complicating an already challenging process for victims.
Another thing that the judges pointed out was that the victim had “abandoned” her two children, who are currently in her husband’s custody. However, this assumption is deeply problematic as women frequently encounter significant obstacles in pursuing custody, such as financial hardships, inadequate legal assistance, and societal stigma.
However , the observations of the judges in the case cannot be said to be completely against , the women, as a statement made does not imply upon the society as a whole. The bench rightly pointed out that ,
“We are not, for a moment, stating that any woman who has suffered cruelty in terms of what has been contemplated under Section 498A of the IPC should remain silent and forbear herself from making a complaint or initiating any criminal proceeding. That is not the intention of our aforesaid observations.
However, we should not encourage a case like the present one, where, as a counterblast to the petition for dissolution of marriage sought by the first appellant-husband of the second respondent herein, a complaint under Section 498A of the IPC is lodged by the latter. In fact, the insertion of the said provision is meant mainly for the protection of a woman who is subjected to cruelty in the matrimonial home, primarily due to an unlawful demand for any property or valuable security in the form of dowry. However, sometimes it is misused, as in the present case.”
READ ALSO: 498A (Cruelty Law) Being Misused For Personal Vendetta Against Husband: Supreme Court
In an interview with Economic Times, Sanjay Jain, Senior Advocate and Former Additional Solicitor General of India (ASG), also commented on the recent judgment in Dara Lakshmi Narayana. He expressed that the ,
“Ruling by Justice Nagaratna and Justice Kotiswar Singh comes at a crucial time, offering relief to the sanctity of marriage in India, which has been struggling in recent times. Jain highlighted that despite the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Bhajan Lal case, Constitutional Courts have been somewhat cautious in applying its principles in Section 498A IPC cases, likely with good intentions to protect women’s rights”
Section 498A, is not only a law put in force for the protection of women but its growing misuse has started affecting the entire idea of a happy family. The time has come to address these cases with a more pragmatic approach. The judgment thus reaffirms that vague, broad, and general allegations cannot serve as the basis for criminal prosecution under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.This decision reinforces that legal provisions meant to protect victims should not be used to harass or malign innocent individuals, especially when they have no direct involvement in the alleged acts of cruelty.
Conclusively , the judgement can be seen in a two-pronged approach. It not only highlights the misuse of the laws by the women , but also does not affect the women who are actually affected by the cruelty at home by the husband and the relatives. The court has made it very clear that it does not seek to affect , the women who are actually suffering inside the four walls of the house.
The judgment highlights the necessity of shielding innocent family members from wrongful prosecution, especially when they are falsely implicated without any evidence connecting them to the alleged acts. In this case, the Court quashed the FIR against the husband’s family members, who lived in different cities and had no involvement in the claimed harassment. This ruling emphasizes the judiciary’s responsibility to prevent the legal system from being overburdened by baseless cases.
The decision strikes a careful balance by safeguarding genuine victims of domestic abuse while addressing the misuse of legal provisions like Section 498A for personal vendettas.
It reaffirms the judiciary’s role as a protector against frivolous litigation and ensures that legal mechanisms are not exploited for personal gain.
By emphasizing judicial discretion and scrutiny, the ruling promotes fairness, efficiency, and justice in matrimonial disputes, serving as a significant reminder of the importance of maintaining integrity within the legal system.
READ THE JUDGEMENT HERE:
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
