Misuse of Section 498A of IPC: Balancing Justice and Protection

Background:

Recently, Delhi High Court in Vikram Ruhal vs Delhi Police noted the misuse of section 498A. While granting relief to the petitioner who was named in an F.I.R. by his sister-in-law due to which his appointment in Delhi police kept on abeyance, the court held that there is growing trend of invoking section 498A of IPC to name the entire family member in the F.I.R. and afterward such case are sorted out outside the court taking excuse of heat of moment. Though, the court did not ignore its importance in protecting the married women from abuses at the hand of her husband and his relatives, yet it is equally important to stop such misuses of such laws. Its objective is to curb the dowry death and harassment to a married woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. 

What is section 498A?

Section 498A was introduced in the year 1983 to save women from cruelty by her husband his relatives. It prescribes fines and sentence of imprisonment which may extend to 3 years. It gives a wide connotation to the term “cruelty” ranging from infliction of physical harm to mental harm.  Furthermore, it also defines such cruelty which may coerce the women or her relative to meet its dowry demand. Section 498A of Indian Penal Code 1860 states that Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.—Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be pun­ished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation.—For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means—

(a)    any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or

(b)   harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.

It should further read with section 113A of Indian Evidence Act 1872 which states that 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. Explanation — for the purposes of this section, “cruelty” shall have the same meaning as in Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.

Offence under this section is non-bailable and cognizable which means that police may arrest the accused without warrant. Information of such offence could be made by the aggrieved women or anyone related to her by blood, marriage, or adoption to the officer in charge of the police station. In case there are not relatives as provided, then any public servant belonging to such class or category may be defined by state government.

 

Misuse of section 498A:

While this section has proved to be sound enough in deterring such violence against women in our society, yet there are around 5,520 false cases registered under this section and 16, 151 cases has been closed due to insufficient evidences, out of 1,11,549 case registered under this section. This data is of National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB) released in the year 2020. Many of these cases happen due to heat of moments which results in irreparable suffering to the accused and his family members.

It is quite obvious nowadays to abuse the process of law by misusing the loopholes available in such law. In patriarchal society of ours, men are never considered to suffer, yet men do suffer due to such beliefs and gender biased laws. It has become a tool to harass innocent persons. Such misuses result in sufferings to the accused in many ways-

 Mental Harassment: Many instances has cropped up where women are yelling at their husband and fighting at every talk in the public.

False Accusation: It has been seen that such misuse is done to falsely accuse the innocent person to extort money, or any personal gain in divorce and custody cases. This can cause great injustice to such innocent person.

Dowry Harassment:  this section has been enacted to curb the dowry related issues prevalent in India. But nowadays, false dowry harassment cases are filed to harass the innocent person.

Overzealous Arrest: As offence under this section is cognizable, the police officers have hastily proceeded to arrest the accused on mere complaint without proper investigation and evidence. And such arrested person incarcerated for months till he get bail. Such arrests go against the principle of justice.

Abuse of Law: Many a times, it is being used for ulterior motives leading to wastage of time of the court which affects the society at large. Without any evidence or proof malicious prosecution is instated against husband.

Malimath Committee report of 2013 has also taken note of “general complaint” to be of gross misuse. Rulings of courts have come to express its views in this regard by way of its judgement on such issues.

In Geeta Mehrotra and Another v/s State of UP and Another,  the court held that mere F.I.R. is not sufficient to show any material fact which may constitute offence under this act. There must physical or mental torture against the aggrieved person to constitute offence under this act. The court quashed F.I.R. and also set aside the criminal proceeding.

In Vimal Kumar vs State of UP, the court made observations that A person is not immediately arrested by a police officer pursuant to Section 498 A; instead, the police officer must first satisfy oneself and ensure compliance with the provisions outlined in Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code (1973). The police officer must review a list made available by section 41 (1)(b)(ii). When necessary, the police officer will review the list and note the reason for the arrest before bringing the accused person before the magistrate for additional custody. After reviewing the police officer's report and being satisfied that it is accurate, the magistrate will record an order for the accused's arrest. Within two weeks of the date the lawsuit was filed, the accused would get notice under section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, which might be served on the district's superintendent of police if a written justification, was provided.

Remedies against Section 498A:

The innocent husband and his family must suffer as a result of legal gaps that exist somewhere. There is no need to panic because every problem has a solution. Some protection is provided from the wife's misuse of section 498 A of the IPC against the husband and his family members.

Apply for Anticipatory Bail:

After the wife files a FIR under section 498 A, if the person feels or fears that he may be arrested on false charges, he should hire a competent criminal attorney and ask the High Court or the Court of Session for guidance. Anticipatory bail works like pain medicine. The person can seek for anticipatory bail under section 438 CrPC to get protection against section 498 A IPC.

Quashing of FIR:

 

Based on your evidence having sufficient proof of not being guilty satisfied the court, the Court has inherent power to pass an order or to prevent abuse of the legal system or otherwise secure the end of justice. When the false FIR is registered against the husband and his family members under section 498 A, then he has a path to move to the High Court to get quash a FIR under section 482 of CrPC.

Restitution of Conjugal Right:

When a wife withdraws from society or moves out of the marital home to live with her father's family, the aggrieved party may petition the district court for the restitution of the conjugal right as specified in section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Apply for Defamation:

A husband has the right to file a defamation case against his wife if the wife is trying to tarnish his or her reputation in society, believes that doing so will harm, and the husband feels insulted by the wife after she files a fictitious case under section 498 A of the IPC against her.

Conclusion:

A balance must be struck between combating usage and protecting victims of domestic violence, even while the overuse of Section 498A is a reason for worry. The Indian legal system ought to aim towards putting policies into place that guard against unfounded complaints while swiftly delivering justice to individuals who are actually harmed. By doing this, the law may safeguard married women and uphold justice and fairness for all, fulfilling its intended goal.