Supreme Court mandates a 2-month cooling-off period before any arrest under Section 498A IPC. Approves Allahabad HC’s safeguards to curb misuse in matrimonial disputes.
New Delhi: Today, on July 22, the Supreme Court of India has taken a significant step towards preventing the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with cruelty to a woman by her husband or in-laws.
The top court has upheld the guidelines laid down earlier by the Allahabad High Court that mandate a two-month “cooling-off period” before any arrest can be made in such cases.
The ruling came in the matter titled Shivangi Bansal vs. Sahib Bansal [Transfer Petition (C) No. 2367 of 2023], and other connected matters.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, delivered the verdict on July 22, 2025, with the judgment authored by Justice Masih.
The Supreme Court observed that this cooling-off period would allow the families involved in marital disputes some breathing space to explore reconciliation or settlement without the fear of immediate police action.
The court said,
“Such conduct could evaporate the traditional fragrance of our age-old institution of marriage.”
The case involved a long-standing dispute between Shivangi Bansal (also known as Shivangi Goel) and her husband Sahib Bansal. The couple had married in 2015 and had a daughter in 2016, but separated in 2018 due to growing marital issues.
Since their separation, over 20 different litigations—including domestic violence complaints, criminal cases under Section 498A IPC, maintenance claims, and transfer petitions—had been filed across courts in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh.
The key question before the court was whether arrests under Section 498A should be delayed to prevent its misuse and whether multiple ongoing legal disputes could be resolved through mutual agreement.
After a detailed review of the case and related issues, the Supreme Court upheld the guidelines issued by the Allahabad High Court in its 2022 ruling in Criminal Revision No. 1126 of 2022, especially paragraphs 32 to 38, which included procedural safeguards to reduce wrongful arrests and promote fair investigation in matrimonial matters.
The Court approved the following directions:
“No arrest or police action shall be made before the lapse of two months from the lodging of the FIR or complaint under Section 498A IPC.”
During this two-month cooling-off period, the matter must be referred to a Family Welfare Committee (FWC). Each district in the country is to have at least one such committee set up under the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA).
The committees will include young mediators, retired judges, experienced social workers, or legal professionals.
Importantly, the Supreme Court also ruled that
“FWC members cannot be called as witnesses.”
Further, the court directed that
“all complaints under 498A IPC shall be sent to the Family Welfare Committee before any police action.”
These committees will then deliberate with both parties and also four elder family members (two from each side) and are expected to submit a report within two months.
The bench made it clear that
“The Magistrate may defer coercive proceedings until the FWC report is received.”
It further instructed that
“Investigating Officers must be trained in matrimonial disputes and act with utmost sincerity and transparency.”
If both parties reach an agreement, the District Judge may dispose of the case, and the Legal Services Authority may provide necessary technical and logistical support to the FWCs.
To ensure effective implementation, the bench directed:
“The Registrar General of the Allahabad High Court was directed to circulate the order to all District and Sessions Judges and Police Chiefs for implementation within a month.”
In the present matter, both parties informed the Supreme Court that they had reached an amicable resolution of their disputes.
They were represented by Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra (for Shivangi Bansal) and Senior Advocate Vikas Singh (for Sahib Bansal).
As per the terms of the mutual settlement, the court passed the following directions:
- Custody of the daughter Ms. Raina was granted to the mother, with supervised visitation rights to the father.
- All civil and criminal proceedings between the parties were quashed.
- The wife agreed to forego alimony and maintenance.
- An apology by Shivangi Bansal will be published in national newspapers and on social media, though “without admission of liability.”
- A property belonging to the wife’s mother was transferred to the husband.
- Lastly, “Both parties [are] barred from filing future litigation against each other.”
Invoking its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court also dissolved the marriage and ensured all terms of settlement would be carried out in full.
ALSO READ: 498A (Cruelty Law) Being Misused For Personal Vendetta Against Husband: Supreme Court
This judgment, cited as 2025 INSC 883, is being hailed as a path-breaking decision balancing the rights of women who suffer genuine cruelty and the rights of innocent men and their families wrongly dragged into criminal cases.
By approving the guidelines laid down by the Allahabad High Court, the Supreme Court has taken a progressive step towards encouraging conciliation over confrontation in family disputes, while also safeguarding the constitutional rights of the accused from arbitrary arrests and abuse of process.
Understanding the Misuse of Section 498A IPC: What the Data Reveals
One of the most pressing reasons behind the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the Allahabad High Court’s guidelines on Section 498A IPC is the rising concern about the misuse of this provision.
Originally enacted to protect married women from cruelty and harassment, particularly dowry-related abuse, Section 498A has over the years gained a reputation for being frequently misused as a tool of vengeance during marital discord.
ALSO READ: How Can Bedridden Grandparents Implicated in Sec 498A Case? Bombay HC
According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, over 1.2 lakh cases were registered under Section 498A IPC in 2022 alone.
However, a deep dive into the statistics reveals a troubling pattern — the conviction rate in such cases remains below 15%, while a substantial number of complaints are withdrawn or found to be false during the investigation phase.
In fact, more than 80% of the accused are either acquitted or the cases are dropped. As per NCRB’s 2021 report, around 23,000 cases filed under 498A IPC were closed by police citing them as “false” or due to “mistake of fact or law.”
This discrepancy between the number of FIRs and actual convictions signals a significant gap between intention and execution in the law’s application.
This alarming trend has not gone unnoticed by the judiciary. Courts across India have observed that while the law was enacted with noble intent, it has increasingly been used as a weapon rather than a shield.
The Supreme Court itself had earlier remarked in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2014) that
“arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and casts scars forever,”
and thus, arbitrary arrests in 498A cases must be curbed.
By mandating a two-month cooling-off period before any arrest can be made and requiring that complaints be routed through Family Welfare Committees (FWCs), the Supreme Court has attempted to restore balance.
These guidelines not only aim to protect genuinely aggrieved women but also safeguard innocent family members from legal harassment. The decision acknowledges that familial relationships are complex, and often, emotions run high in matrimonial disputes.
Thus, an immediate arrest, especially without preliminary investigation or reconciliation efforts, can irreparably damage families.
Moreover, this judgment may serve as a precedent for other courts across India to rethink the procedural aspects of handling sensitive family matters. It emphasizes conciliation over confrontation, dialogue over detention, and due process over emotional impulse.
In sum, the Supreme Court’s recognition of real-world misuse, supported by empirical data, marks a pivotal shift in the judicial approach towards matrimonial litigation in India.
The ruling does not dilute the importance of 498A IPC — rather, it strengthens its integrity by ensuring it is not misapplied, thereby upholding both legal accountability and familial harmony.
Read Judgement:
READ MORE REPORTS ON SECTION 498A
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
