IPC Siddharth Jain - 18065-2

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 17

INDIAN PENAL CODE

‘LEGAL TERRORISM VIS-À-VIS SECTION 498A’

Submitted by - Submitted to -
Name: Siddharth Jain Dr. Sharanjit Kaur
Roll No.: 18065 Associate Prof. of Law, RGNUL
Group No.: 11

RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW

2021
Acknowledgement
I have taken efforts in this project; however, it would not have been possible to complete this
project without the help and supervision of Dr. Sharanjit Kaur.
I would like to thank both the teachers and the college for providing me with the required resources
and help.
I am highly indebted to Dr. Sharanjit Kaur for providing me with this enriching assignment which
not only helped me doing rigorous research work but also enhanced my literary knowledge.
I would express my gratitude to both my parents for being constantly supportive and co-operative,
which helped me in completion of this project.
My thanks and appreciation would also extend to all my classmates who willingly helped me out
with their abilities.
Introduction
Section 498-A was introduced in the year 1983 to protect married women from being subjected to
cruelty by the husband or his relatives. A punishment extending to 3 years and fine has been
prescribed. The expression “cruelty” has been defined in wide terms so as to include inflicting
physical or mental harm to the body or health of the woman and indulging in acts of harassment
with a view to coerce her or her relations to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable
security. Harassment for dowry falls within the sweep of latter limb of the section. Creating a
situation driving the woman to commit suicide is also one of the ingredients of “cruelty”.1

According to the National Crime Records Bureau’s report (2012 data), 8,233 incidences of dowry
deaths were reported under Section B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and 1,06,527 incidences of
cruelty by husband or his relatives under Section 498A of IPC. It is evident that it will take too
long to cure the malady of crime against women in India and the insertion of Section 498A of
Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is an
attempt towards safeguarding and providing protection to the women from violence of all kinds.
It is one of the major anti-dowry laws in India.

Section 498A was introduced in the year 1983 after seeing the rampant nature and prevalence of
reported cases for cruelty against women. The insertion of Section 498A IPC is a penal provision
together with allied provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure are so designed as to impart an
element of deterrence. However, instances of false and exaggerated allegations and implication of
several relatives of the husband and his family have been pouring in a rampant manner leading to
a widespread acknowledgment of these beneficiary laws as a means to exact revenge by
disgruntled wives.2

This section‘s violence is increasingly growing as well-educated women know that this section is
both cognizable and non-bailable and can thus be caused by a woman’s simple accusation, thereby
putting the man behind bars. Section 498A was adopted in 1983, after seeing the widespread

1
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
2
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
existence and severity of recorded cases of female cruelty. The implementation of Section 498A
IPC is a punitive provision in accordance with allied provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure so
intended to impart a deterrent feature. However, cases of false and exaggerated allegations and
involvement of several of the husband’s and his family’s relatives have been spreading rampantly,
leading to widespread recognition of these beneficiary laws as a means of exacting the wives
revenge.3

Provision under 498A


Section 498A of IPC came as a significant addition to the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which was
introduced in 1983 to safeguard the rights and empowerment of women. Under Section 498A of
the Indian Penal Code, extortion of any form of property by subjecting a woman to cruelty is
punishable. The Government of India amended the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) by way of the
Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 on 26 December 1983, and inserted a new Section
498(A) under Chapter XX-A, of Cruelty by Husband or Relatives of Husband.4

The word ‘cruelty’ has been described in broad terms so as to include causing physical or mental
harm to the body or health of the woman and indulging in acts of harassment with a view to coerce
her or her relations to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable protection.

The section was enacted to deal with the threat of dowry deaths. It was implemented in the code
by the Criminal Law Reform Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983). By the same Act, Section 113-A has
been added to the Indian Evidence Act to raise presumption regarding abetment of suicide by a
married woman. The main aim of the I.P.C section 498-A is to shield a woman who is being abused
by her husband or husband’s relatives.5

Harassment for dowry falls within the sweeping of the Section’s latter limb and creating a
condition that pushes the woman to commit suicide is also one of the ingredients of ‘cruelties’.6 It
states that if such a woman is subjected to cruelty by a husband or relative of a woman’s husband,

3
Cruelty to Women [S. 498-A IPC and allied sections], SCC Online Blog, available at
https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2018/12/03/law-for-laymen-section-498-a-ipc-and-allied-sections-cruelty-to-
women/
4
Misuse of IPC Section 498A, Lawtendo, available at https://www.lawtendo.com/blogs/misuse-of-ipc-section-498a
5
498A Use and Misuse, B&B Associates LLP, available at https://bnblegal.com/article/498a-use-and-misuse/
6
Section 498A of IPC: Legal Terrorism, by Trinabrata Das, available at
https://medium.com/@trinabratadas/section-498a-of-ipc-legal-terrorism-d037da464bd9
he shall be punished with imprisonment for a period of up to three years and also liable to fine.
The crime under Section 498A is cognizable, non-compoundable and non-bailable.

Section 113A: Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman

When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her
husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a
period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her
husband had subjected her to cruelty, the court may presume, having regard to all the other
circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative
of her husband.7

Objection & Caution

Section 498-A IPC was introduced with the avowed object to combat the menace of dowry deaths
and harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband or his relatives. Nevertheless, the provision
should not be used as a device to achieve oblique motives, Onkar Nath Mishra v. State (NCT of
Delhi).8

Ingredients of 498A
For the commission of an offence under Section 498-A, following necessary ingredients require
to be satisfied:9

 The woman must be married;


 She must be subjected to cruelty or harassment; and
 Such cruelty or harassment must have been shown either by the husband of the woman or
by the relative of her husband.

This section’s bare perusal points out that the word ‘cruelty’ covers the occurrence of the following
Act(s):10

7
Misuse of IPC Section 498A, Lawtendo, available at https://www.lawtendo.com/blogs/misuse-of-ipc-section-498a
8
(2008) 2 SCC 561.
9
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
10
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
 any willful behavior which might lead a woman to suicide or cause serious damage or
danger to life, limb, or life;
 a woman’s health (mental or physical);
 Harassment of a woman in the event of such harassment, with a view to obliging her or
any other person related to her to fulfil an illegal requirement for any property or valuable
security.

In case of, Kaliyaperumal v. State of Tamil Nadu,11 the Hon’ble Court held that in offences under
each of Sections 304B and 498A of the IPC, cruelty may be a common element. Nevertheless, the
two sections are not reciprocally inclusive, each articulate offence connected with guilty persons
under section 304B of the dowry death offence shall be guilty of an offence under section 498A
of the IPC. Section 304B does not contain its definition, but further applies in section 304B the
concept of cruelty or abuse specified in section 498-A. Under section 498A of the IPC, cruelty
alone amounts to a related crime, while under Section 304B the offence relates to gift death and
that death should have occurred during the seven-year marriage period. However, no such sum is
stated in section 498A.12

Classification of Offense under Section 498A13

1. Cognizable offense – Offences are divided into cognizable and non-cognizable. Cognizable
offenses are those where the police can arrest without any warrant in accordance with the
First Schedule or under any other law for the time being in force. The cases reported under
498A are cognizable if information related to the commission of the offense is given to the
officer.
2. Non-Compoundable Offense – The offenses registered under 498A are non-compoundable
except in Andhra Pradesh. Non-compoundable offenses are those in which the complaint
cannot be withdrawn e.g., rape, dowry death, murder, etc.
3. Non-Bailable Offense – There are two kinds of offenses, bailable and non-bailable. 498A
is non-bailable. Non-bailable offenses are serious offenses where bail is a privilege and

honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
11
AIR 2003 SC 3828.
12
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
13
498A Use and Misuse, B&B Associates LLP, available at https://bnblegal.com/article/498a-use-and-misuse/
only the courts can grant it. The cases under 498A are non-bailable and bail can be granted
under the discretion of the magistrate

Period of Limitation
As per Section 468 CrPC, a complaint alleging commission of an offence under Section 498-A
can be filed within 3 years of the alleged incident. However, Section 473 CrPC enables the Court
to take cognizance of an offence after the period of limitation if it is satisfied that it is necessary
so to do in the interest of justice. The essence of the offence in Section 498-A is cruelty. It is a
continuing offence and on each occasion on which the woman was subjected to cruelty, she would
have a new starting point of limitation, Arun Vyas v. Anita Vyas14

When can the court the take cognizance?

No Court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Section 498-A except upon a police
report of facts which constitute such offence or upon a complaint made by the person aggrieved
by the offence or by her father, mother, brother, sister or by her father’s or mother’s brother or
sister. The Court can also take cognizance if the complaint is made by any other person related to
her by blood, marriage or adoption with Court’s permission.15

Misuse of Section 498A


A violation of this section is done by women by creating frivolously false allegations against their
husbands with the goal of getting some money or just paining the family. This section’s abuse is
increasing chop-chop and therefore the ladies usually apprehend their husbands.16

Section 498A was designed and inserted into the legal framework by the lawmakers with the idea
of protecting women from cruelty, harassment and other offences. But when cross-investigations
are performed to test the validity of these laws, the number of acquittals relative to convictions
was greater. Thus, one who brought 498A into action conceiving it as a shield against cruelty for

14
(1999) 4 SCC 690.
15
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
16
Section 498A of IPC: Legal Terrorism, by Trinabrata Das, available at
https://medium.com/@trinabratadas/section-498a-of-ipc-legal-terrorism-d037da464bd9
women, i.e., the Supreme Court, is now considering it as legal terrorism. Because misuse of
Section 498A diminishes its true credibility.17 That is one of several reasons for calling it an anti-
male law. Although there are widespread complaints, and even large-scale misuse has been
recognized by the judiciary, there is no reliable data based on the empirical study regarding the
extent of the alleged misuse.

In case of, Savitri Devi v. Ramesh Chand & Ors, the Hon’ble Court specifically regulates the abuse
connected with the manipulation of the laws to such an extent that it was totally influenced by the
influence of marriage itself and thus found not to be intelligent for the welfare of the giant
community. The court considered that authorities and lawmakers had to review the case and the
legal provisions to prevent it from happening.18

In the case of, Saritha v. R. Ramachandran, the Court noted the reverse trend and requested a non-
cognizable and bailable offence from the Law Commission and Parliament. However, it was the
court’s requirement to condemn wrongdoing and to shield the victim from what happens once the
victim becomes the abuser. Here is what remedy the husband will have. On this ground, the lady
gets to divorce her husband and remarry or in the form of compensation may gain cash.19

In the case of Anju v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, In the case, the wife of the Petitioner challenged the
order of the Lower Court, whereby the Court discharged the charges against the respondents under
section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.20

In appreciating the facts of the case, the Court noted that in the FIR, the wife of the Petitioner in
one breath named all members of the family without any specific role being assigned to any of
them. Thus, no details were provided as to when the recorded instances allegedly occurred, or any
facts to substantiate or corroborate the allegations against relatives of the spouse. The Court also
noted that the allegations against the respondents were fairly general and unspecific. The plaintiff
did not mention a date, time, month, or year when she was subjected to beating them. In view of
the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court of Bombay upheld the
order of the Revisional Court and held that the Court had made no mistake in concluding that,

17
Section 498A of IPC: Legal Terrorism, by Trinabrata Das, available at
https://medium.com/@trinabratadas/section-498a-of-ipc-legal-terrorism-d037da464bd9
18
2003(3) Crimes 100 (Del.).
19
2002 (6) ALD 319.
20
2019 SCC OnLine Del 6865.
apart from the general and omnibus allegations that roped in all relations, there is no recorded
material to justify the framing of charges under Section 498A IPC.21

In the case of, Chandra Bhan v. State, the Hon’ble Court introduced the steps to prevent the misuse
of this Section:22

1. FIR should not be regularly reported as such;


2. Police endeavour should be to carefully screen complaints and then register FIR;
3. No case should be registered under section 498-A/406 IPC without the prior authorisation
of DCP / Addl. DCP;
4. Before FIR registration, all possible reconciliation efforts should be made and, if it is found
that there is no possibility of settlement, necessary steps should be taken in the first instance
to ensure that stridhan and dowry articles are returned to the complainant;
5. The arrest of the key accused can only be made after a proper investigation and with the
prior approval of the ACP / DCP has been performed;
6. In the case of collateral accused such as in-laws, prior approval of DCP should be there on
the file.

In the case of, Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others, the Supreme Court held that the
purpose of the provision is to prevent a threat to the dowry. But as the petitioner rightly satisfied
that many instances have come to light where the complaints are not bonafide and are filed with
oblique motive. In these cases, the acquittal of the accused will not wash out the ignominy incurred
during and before the court in any case. Adverse media attention also contributes to the situation.23

Hence, the question is what remedial steps can be taken to discourage misuse of the well-
intentioned clause. Just because the provision is constitutional and intra vires, it does not allow
unscrupulous people to wreck personal vendetta or unleash harassment. Thus, it may become
necessary for the legislature to find ways to deal appropriately with the makers of frivolous

21
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
22
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
23
AIR 2005 SC 3100.
complaints or allegations. Until then, under the current system function, the Courts have to take
care of the situation.24

But new lawful terrorism can be unleashed by misuse of the provision. The object of the law is to
use a shield and not the arms of an attacker. There is no question of the investigative agency and
courts treating the allegations lightly. In matters relating to dowry torture, death and cruelty, they
cannot follow any straitjacket formula. It cannot be lost sight that the ultimate aim of any legal
system is to reach the truth, punish the guilty and protect the innocent. Some preconceived idea or
perception has no scope. The complainant strongly claims that the enforcement agencies and the
courts begin with the presumptions that the accused are guilty and that the plaintiff speaks the
truth. This argument is too broad and generalized. Some statutory presumptions are drawn which
are again reprehensible. It should be noted that the role of the investigating agencies and the courts
is a watchdog and not a bloodhound.25

Their intention will be to ensure that an innocent person is not made to suffer because of baseless,
groundless, and malicious accusations. It is equally undisputed that there is no direct evidence
available in many cases, and that the courts must act on circumstantial evidence. The law
developed in relation to circumstantial evidence which must be held in mind when dealing with
these cases.

Many women’s rights teams go against the concept of making the crime a non-cognizable and
bailable one assuming this gives the defendant a chance to escape prosecution. What this might
do, though, is that it will provide the individual with a chance and, in turn, promote the
accomplishment of the ends of justice. Justice will protect the weaker and ensure that the wrong-
doer gets a chance to say back his/her due. When ladies suspect their husbands below Section
498A IPC by making the crime and unrecognizable, if the person is innocent he does not get a
quick opportunity to urge justice and delayed justice is denied justice.26

24
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
25
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
26
Misuse of IPC Section 498A, Lawtendo, available at https://www.lawtendo.com/blogs/misuse-of-ipc-section-498a
That, the lawmakers will prescribe how to create this section objectively to someone who has
decided that the right party is punished and therefore justice is granted to the wrong person. Ladies’
role continues to be dangerous in India. They still want rights in society to mitigate themselves,
but many times they neglect to consider the rights of others as long as their unit in the area of rights
is guaranteed.27 These days’ educated lady should believe the slogan of equality and relentless
demand but the pattern is slowly getting reversed.

Because of the false accusations and the immoral exercise of section 498A, the innocent, i.e. the
husband and his family, are exponential to suffer. Some of the men give up and commit suicide
during this period of hardship and ignominy. Here the law must exercise the power with thorough
investigation and cross-examination of the whole matter in a just manner.28

Constitutional validity of 498A


Several cases have come to light where the allegations are not bonafide and with oblique reasons
have been lodged. In such cases, the acquittal of the accused does not wipe out the ignominy
suffered during and before the trial in all cases. Adverse media coverage occasionally adds to the
misery. New legal terrorism may be created by the abuse of the clause. The provision is intended
to act as a shield and not as the weapon of an assassin. A mere probability of a legal provision
being misused does not invalidate it.29

Therefore, the Supreme Court has given certain directions in cases of Section 498A:

In the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, the Hon’ble Court held that, In an effort to ensure
that police officer does not unnecessarily arrest the accused and that the Magistrate does not allow
for casual and mechanical detention in cases pursuant to Section 498A IPC, the Court gave certain

27
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
28
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
29
Ibid.
directions (although the directions also apply to other cases where the offence is punishable by
imprisonment not exceeding seven years) including:30

1. Police officers not to arrest the accused immediately after the filing of a case under 498A
IPC; they should satisfy themselves that arrest is necessary under parameters that flow from
Section 41 CrPC (the judgment sets the parameters).
2. Police officers shall fill out the checklist (including the sub-clauses stated under Section
41(1)(b)(ii) of the CrPC) and include the grounds and evidence for the arrest.
3. The Magistrate shall authorize detention only after the police officers have noted their
satisfaction with the report.
4. Where the police officers fail to comply with the directions, they shall be liable for
departmental action and punishment for contempt of the Court.
5. If the Judicial Magistrate fails to comply with the orders, he shall be held liable by the
appropriate High Court for the departmental action.

In case of, Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh31 the Hon’ble Court issued instructions to
prevent the misuse of Section 498-A IPC which was further amended in the Manav Adhikar v.
Union of India Social Action Forum32. Such guidelines include:

1. Complaints pursuant to Section 498-A and other related offences may only be examined
by a designated area investigator.
2. Where a settlement is reached between the parties, they may approach the High Court
pursuant to Section 482 seeking the quashing of proceedings or any other order.
3. If a bail application is submitted to the Public Prosecutor / Complaint with at least one day
notice, the same can be decided on the same day, where possible. Recovery of disputed
dowry items may not, by itself, be a ground for denial of bail if it is otherwise possible to
protect the maintenance or other rights of women / minor children.

30
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
31
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
32
2018 SCC OnLine SC 1501.
4. It should not be routine for persons ordinarily resident in India to impound passports or
issue Red Corner Notices.
5. Such rules shall not extend to actual physical harm or death.

In the case of, Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India, The petition had been
submitted in compliance with Article 32 of the Constitution. The petitioners argued that it is not
false that there are a number of women who suffer abuse in the hands of the husband and his family
and that the allegation that Section 498A is being misused is not based on such misuse from any
specific date. It was further argued that the social intent behind Section 498A IPC is being lost as
the rigour of the said provision has been diluted and the offence has been made bailable, due to
various qualifications and limitations imposed by different decisions of this Court, including
Rajesh Sharma v. U.P. State.33

The Court concluded, after referring to the directions, that the direction with regard to Family
Welfare Committees and their duties is not in accordance with any provision of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. The offence of cruelty is an offence that is not accountable and
recognizable, but because of the direction that makes it impossible to arrest before such
committee’s report makes it ineffective. Thus, as explained further, the directions given in the
Rajesh Sharma case have been amended by the Court.

The role of the Family Welfare Committee as to its composition and duties has been ruled
inadmissible. Furthermore, the settlement route has been revised to provide that, if a settlement is
reached, the parties may, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, approach the High
Court.

In the case of, Inder Raj Malik and Ors. v. Sumita Malik, it was argued to be ultra vires Article 14
and Article 20(2) of the Constitution. There is the Dowry Prohibition Act which also deals with
specific types of cases; thus, both laws together establish a condition generally referred to them as
double threat. But this argument is negated by Delhi High Court and held that this provision does
not establish a situation for double threat. Section 498-A is distinguishable from section 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act because pure demand for dowry is punishable in the latter and the presence

33
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
of an element of cruelty is not required, whereas section 498-A deals with the aggravated form of
the offence. It punishes the wife or her family with such demands for property or valuable
protection as are combined with violence towards her. Therefore, both the offences punishable
under section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and this provision may be charged by an individual.34

This section gives the courts wide discretion when it comes to interpreting the terms that appear
in the laws and even when it comes to sentencing. This is not an ultra vires clause. It does not place
absolute authority on courts.35

Recovery in case of false accusations


In the case where there are false allegations put on the men by his wife and he has proved innocent
in the eyes of the law. He can fight the case misuse of 498A. The Indian government and
jurisprudence continue to incorporate inputs to protect women, and men are not ignored by law
either. Justice still takes precedence over injustice. Thus, the men whose reputation is defamed
with false allegations that opt for some legal recovery measures and seek protection from Section
498A IPC. These are:36

1. Under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, the husband can file a defamation lawsuit;
2. Under Section 9 of the CPC, the husband can file a claim for recovery of damages which
he and his family have been subjected to for the false allegations of cruelty and abuse;
3. Section 182 of the IPC is one of the safeguards against false 498A cases widely used. If
the authority considers that the averages rendered were invalid, under Section 182 of the
IPC, the culprit is sentenced to 6 months or fine imprisonment, or both. The person will be
charged for misleading false information on the part of the judiciary.

Directions of the Supreme Court

34
Section 498A of IPC: Legal Terrorism, by Trinabrata Das, available at
https://medium.com/@trinabratadas/section-498a-of-ipc-legal-terrorism-d037da464bd9
35
Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over women's rights, Firstpost,
available at https://www.firstpost.com/india/domestic-violence-supreme-court-verdict-on-section-498a-puts-family-
honour-over-womens-rights-
3870627.html#:~:text=Union%20of%20India%2C%20the%20Supreme,should%20find%20out%20ways%20in
36
Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders, available at https://blog.ipleaders.in/misuse-section-498a-
ipc/#Introduction
I. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar37

In an endeavour to ensure that police officers do not arrest the accused unnecessarily and
Magistrate do not authorise detention casually and mechanically in cases under Section 498-A
IPC, the Court gave certain directions (however, the directions apply also to other cases where
offence is punishable with imprisonment of not more than seven years) which include:

a) Police officers not to automatically arrest the accused when a case under 498-A IPC is
registered. They should satisfy themselves about the necessity of arrest under parameters
flowing from Section 41 CrPC (the judgment lays down the parameters).
b) Police officers shall fill the checklist (containing specified sub-clauses under Section
41(1)(b)(ii) CrPC) and furnish the reasons and material necessitating the arrest.
c) The Magistrate will authorise detention only after recording its satisfaction on the report
furnished by the police officers.
d) If the police officers fail to comply with the directions, they will be liable for departmental
action as well as punishment for contempt of Court.
e) Failure of the Judicial Magistrate to comply with the directions will render him liable for
departmental action by the appropriate High Court.

II. Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P.38

In this case, too, the Supreme Court gave directions to prevent misuse of Section 498-A IPC which
were further modified in Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India39. These
directions include:

a) Complaints under Section 498A and other connected offences may be investigated only by
a designated Investigating Officer of the area.
b) If a settlement is reached between the parties, it is open to them to approach the High Court
under Section 482 seeking quashing of proceedings or any other order.

37
(2014) 8 SCC 273.
38
2017 SCC OnLine SC 821.
39
2018 SCC OnLine SC 1501.
c) If a bail application is filed with at least one day’s notice to the Public
Prosecutor/complainant, the same may be decided as far as possible on the same day.
Recovery of disputed dowry items may not, by itself, be a ground for denial of bail if
maintenance or other rights of wife/minor children can otherwise be protected.
d) In respect of persons ordinarily residing out of India impounding of passports or issuance
of Red Corner Notice should not be a routine.
e) These directions will not apply in case of tangible physical injuries or death.

Conclusion
Misuse of Section 498A is not a rumour it is proved now, the woman laid down a false charge
under the provisions of Section 498A IPC and created her husband under the rule. The boys have
no laws to protect themselves from women’s abuse. Moreover, in every district court case, section
498A IPC was misused. The cases were still unresolved, and the square measure of husbands
paying maintenance to their wife just because he’s husband doesn’t mean he’s to blame for all the
expenditures and benefits. The ladies are scammers as opposed to men in society. This section is
used as a weapon by the wives to collect some cash from their husband’s. It is the fact that Section
498A IPC is misuse by the women to husbands and in-laws. The tests are finished and published
already. This segment was seen to be keen on people. Section 498A is right to protect women, but
it’s actually harassment of husband and in-laws by a spouse. The effect on society of this example
is terribly unhealthy. The Law Commission addressed the issue concerning abuse of this provision
in its 243 reports on IPC Section 498A. The commission has recommended that the offence can
only be made compoundable with the court’s permission, and precautions must be taken before
granting. The commission has recommended, however, that the offence should remain undeclared.
The abuse does not mean that we are removing the usefulness of the laws that impact the wider
public interest.
Bibliography
1. Domestic violence: Supreme Court verdict on Section 498A puts family honour over

women's rights, Firstpost.

2. Misuse of Section 498A under IPC, Ipleaders.

3. Cruelty to Women [S. 498-A IPC and allied sections], SCC Online Blog.

4. Misuse of IPC Section 498A, Lawtendo.

5. 498A Use and Misuse, B&B Associates LLP.

6. Section 498A of IPC: Legal Terrorism, by Trinabrata Das.

7. Indian Penal Code, Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, LexisNexis.

You might also like