The Supreme Court has dismissed a PIL seeking gender-neutral provisions in dowry harassment (Section 498A IPC) and maintenance laws, questioning the claim of biased misuse. The bench remarked, “We understand this would make a spicy news item, but tell us which provisions are not being misused?”
New Delhi: The Supreme Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) aimed at making dowry harassment and maintenance laws “gender neutral” to prevent their potential misuse.
The court stated that it is not within its purview to legislate laws, emphasizing that such matters should be addressed by Parliament.
The PIL, filed by an NGO, argued that there are instances where these provisions are misused to harass husbands and their families.
During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh remarked,
“We understand this would make a spicy news item, but tell us which provisions in law are not being misused?”
They pointed out that the affected individuals, rather than the NGO, should have approached the court. The PIL sought to amend Section 498A of the IPC (related to dowry harassment) and Section 125 of the CrPC concerning maintenance to make them “gender neutral.”
The court dismissed the petition, asserting that sweeping claims about the misuse of laws designed for the protection and empowerment of women could not be substantiated.
Justice Surya Kant noted,
“Where the husband or his family has been victimised, the law must take its course accordingly. If a woman has been harassed, the law must come to her rescue also. So what is wrong with the provision?”
The bench expressed no intention to interfere with the legislative framework of Section 498A IPC, now referred to as Section 84 of the BNS.
Also Read: Alimony And Maintenance Is Tax-Deductible Or Not?
The court rejected the claim that these provisions violate Article 14 of the Constitution, explaining that Article 15 empowers Parliament to create special laws for the protection of women and children. The bench characterized the allegations of misuse as vague and stated that such claims must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
The NGO’s counsel pointed out that in India, only women can file domestic violence cases, whereas men can do so in other countries.
Justice Surya Kant responded,
“So you want us to legislate. It is not for the court to legislate. For that purpose, Parliamentarians are there to look into it. We cannot strike down a provision just because there are instances of misuse.”
The bench questioned the rationale behind the NGO’s request, asking,
“Why should we follow other countries? We maintain our sovereignty.”
The counsel suggested the court could establish guidelines and expedite cases; however, the bench stated,
“For expediting trials of such cases, we need more infrastructure. We need more magistrates and courts. Directions cannot be passed just like this. There are several factors involved. Who will provide us with more funds? States do not have adequate funds. These are purely administrative issues.”
Justice Surya Kant emphasized that the court cannot act based on media perceptions, asking,
“Can you make a statement that no newly married woman is being harassed for dowry?”
The bench reiterated that it cannot invalidate a law based on broad claims of misuse. The counsel noted that the NGO has received numerous complaints regarding the abuse of legal processes and referred to National Crime Records Bureau data.
The bench indicated that it would not delve into the data at this time but suggested keeping it for future reference in appropriate cases.
The bench concluded,
“We are not denying that the provisions are not misused, but the court has to look into it on a case-by-case basis. One day, you will find a case where a woman was beheaded by her husband. Do you want us to apply this ‘misuse’ concept there? Don’t make such sweeping allegations on a provision,”
The PIL, filed by NGO ‘Janshruti’ (People’s Voice), sought to establish guidelines for maintenance and to declare Sections 125-128 of the CrPC, Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, and related provisions in the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as “gender-neutral.”
It also called for amending Section 498A IPC to ensure balanced protections for all parties in matrimonial disputes.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
