The Delhi High Court criticised police for routinely inserting the phrase “haath mara” in FIRs under Section 354, calling it a gross misuse of law and directing authorities to stop adding unverified allegations not endorsed by complainants.
The Delhi High Court said false rape allegations can cause severe lifelong harm to an innocent accused, including loss of reputation, jail, social stigma and psychological trauma. It added such wounds cannot be healed by discharge or sympathy.
The Supreme Court said anti-dowry laws suffer from both poor enforcement and misuse, allowing the social evil to continue unchecked. Calling dowry eradication a constitutional necessity, the court issued strict directions for faster trials and stronger awareness measures.
The Gujarat High Court quashed an FIR under Section 498A against a father-in-law and mother-in-law, citing vague allegations and lack of evidence. The judgment reinforces action against the misuse of law in matrimonial disputes.
Supreme Court warns against misuse of criminal law, quashes cheating FIR filed to settle personal scores, emphasizing that vindictive proceedings cannot be initiated without proven mens rea.
Experts warn the Constitution (130th Amendment) Bill could be misused against Opposition leaders due to strict bail conditions. They caution the law undermines democratic safeguards and is legally flawed.
Punjab & Haryana High Court quashes fake 498A case, calling allegations vague, frivolous, and actuated by vengeance. The court terms it a gross misuse of law against the husband’s family.
Delhi High Court imposes Rs 10,000 fine on Balbir Meena for misusing SC/ST Victim Compensation Scheme after settling the case. Court says such acts raise “grave doubts” and warns against future abuse of the law.
Delhi High Court quashes FIR and fines woman Rs 20,000 for casually accusing her live-in partner of sexual assault. Court warns such misuse of law harms justice system.
The Supreme Court of India quashed a dowry harassment case due to vague accusations against the husband’s family. The bench criticized the trend of naming multiple relatives without clear evidence and emphasized that strong, specific allegations are essential. This judgment reflects the court’s stance against the misuse of dowry laws.
