MEN’S RIGHT- MISUSE of SECTION-498(A)

Name: Surabhi Dhir

Int. B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) (Specialization in Corporate Laws)
Roll: R450213116
2013-2018

DISSERTATION SYNOPSIS
Submitted under the guidance of: Prof. Shubham Srivastava

This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfillment of the degree of

B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)

School of Law
University of Petroleum and Energy Studies
Dehradun
2017
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the research work entitled “Men’s Right- Misuse of Section 498-
A” is the work done by Prof. Devyani Tewari under my guidance and supervision for
the partial fulfillment of the requirement of B.A.,LL.B (Hons) (Spz. Energy Laws) degree
at School of Law, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun.

Signature & Name of Supervisor: Ms. Devyani Tewari

Designation:

Date :
 DECLARATION

I declare that the dissertation entitled “Men’s Right- Misuse of Section 498-A is the
outcome of my own work conducted under the supervision of Ms. Devyani Tewari, at
School of Law, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun.

I declare that the dissertation comprises only of my original work and due
acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used.

Signature & Name of Student : Surabhi Dhir

Date : 13-08-2018
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1: Section 113-A of Indian Evidence Act

CHAPTER 2: HISTORY, STRUCTURE AND LEGAL FRAME WORK

2.1: Historical background
2.2: Legal Structure
2.3 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

CHAPTER 3: Constitution Validity of Section 498-A

3.1: Meaning
3.2: Misuse of section 498A IPC

CHAPTER 4: CASE STUDY

CHAPTER 5: Conclusion and Suggestion

 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

"Half of the Indian populace comprises of Women. Women have dependably been
victimized and have endured and are enduring segregation in absolute quiet. Altruism and
abstinence are their honorability and backbone but they have been subjected to all
disparities, insults, and segregation". 1

'Marriage is the deliberate association for life of one man and one lady to the avoidance
of all others.' It is a social association where companion has the commitment to fare thee
well and keep up his better half. He can't slight his commitments or obligations. In any
case, on this awesome organization a shame called 'share' still exists. Women are abused,
hassled, slaughtered, separated for the basic reason that they did not brought settlement.

Marital Cruelty in India is a cognizable, non bailable and non compoundable offense. It is
characterized in Chapter XXA of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) Sec. 498A states that:

Husband or relative of husband of a lady subjecting her to pitilessness.

Whoever being the spouse or the relative of the husband of a lady, subjects her to
pitilessness will be rebuffed with detainment for a term, which may reach out to three
years and will likewise be obligated to a fine.

Clarification – with the end goal of this Section, "mercilessness" implies:

(a) any wilful lead which is of such a nature as is probably going to drive the lady to
confer suicide or to make grave damage or threat life, appendage or wellbeing (regardless
of whether mental or physical) of the lady; or

(b) provocation of the lady where such badgering is with a view to constraining her or
any individual identified with her to meet any unlawful requests for any property or
profitable security or is by virtue of disappointment by her or any individual identified
with her to take care of such demand.

1 http://lawtimesjournal.in/
The Section was established to battle the hazard of endowment passing. It was presented
in the code by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983). By a similar
Act area 113-A has been added to the Indian Evidence Act to raise assumption with
respect to abetment of suicide by wedded lady. The fundamental goal of area 498-An of
I.P.C is to ensure a lady who is being badgering by her significant other or relatives of
spouse.

At whatever point an issue is made in the general public or made itself by the general
public for it self-filling need, it doesn't influence the social request which dependably
needs smooth cruising or unobstructed and that stream of social request when achieves
the phase of staleness, it deteriorating impact can be well envision in the upheaval of
irritated peace. Before the year 1983 there was no particular lawful arrangement relating
to savagery against Women atdomestic front. Spouses liable of conferring viciousness on
their wives could be convicted under general arrangements identifying with kill, causing
hurt, abetment to suicide or wrongful confinement. These general arrangements under
criminal law don't consider the specific circumstance of Women confronting brutality
inside bounds of home as against ambush by an outsider or an outsider. Hence, a
correction was made in 1983, which added Section498-A to Chapter XVI, IPC. In its
announcement of the Objects and Reasons the Criminal Law Amendment Act accentuate
"the expanding number of share passing involves genuine concern. The degree of the
malice has been remarked upon by the Joint Committee of the Houses to look at the
working of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Presently day abuse of the arrangement has
turned into a day by day. Wonder. In the advanced days the abuse of this Section is
quickly expanding and the Women regularly knowledgeable to know this section is
cognizable and non-bailable. We are not discussing the endowment passing or physical
damage cases yet about share provocation cases that require no proof and can befiled
simply in view of a solitary sentence dissension by the spouse. In India, a large number of
such false cases are recorded every year. The overview demonstrates that the over 90%
cases fields are false uninterested High courts and Supreme Court. Cases of cold-
bloodedness by the spouse and relatives of the husband which come full circle in suicide
by or murder of hapless Women concerned constitute just a little portion of cases
involving such remorselessness. It is consequently proposed to alter the IPC, the Code of
Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act reasonably to bargain successfully not
just with instances of settlement passing but also instances of brutality to wedded lady by
their in laws".

Section 498 A2 of the Indian Penal Code was introduced in Penal Code by Criminal
Law (Second Amendment) Act of 1983 which came into force with effect from 25 th
December , 1983 making cruelty to a married woman a crime. It broadened the scope
of the term domestic violence and states that: "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." For the purposes of this section, "Cruelty" means— a) any
willful 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." This section regulates that a court can take
cognisance of any offence punishable under this section only upon a complaint made
by the person aggrieved by the offence, or by her relatives. It is cognisable and the
non-bailable. Section 498A of the IPC made violence perpetrated by the husband or in-
laws a cognisable offence. It was aimed as a deterrent to marital violence by enabling
the woman to take preventive action before it led to her death. The law penalises the
perpetrators with a prison term which may extend to three years and or a fine. It also
makes it mandatory for the police to arrest the accused husband or in-laws immediately
after a complaint is registered.

A dowry death is the murder of a young woman; committed by the in-laws, when she
was unable to fulfil their coercive demands for money, articles or property, categorized
as dowry. Organizations across the country pressurized and urged the government to

2 Indian Penal Code, 1860

 provide legislative protection to women against domestic violence and dowry. The
objective was to allow the state to intervene rapidly and prevent the murders of young
girls who were unable to meet the dowry demands of their in-laws. As a result of the
intense campaigning and lobbying, significant amendments were made in the Indian
Penal Code, the Indian Evidence Act and the Dowry Prohibition Act, with the
intention of protecting women from marital violence, abuse and dowry demands.
The most important amendment came in the form of the introduction of Section 498A
in the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Procedure: The victim of Domestic Violence has to file a complaint with the Police.
The Police have orders to verify the facts and as far as possible to refer the case to the
Special Security Cell for Women or Counsellors. On the report of the counsellor, the
police take cognisance of the offence. On arrest of the accused, bail can be given at the
discretion of the judge because this is a non-bail able offence. The Public Prosecutors
represents the complainant woman. But the woman has the option of being represented
by a private lawyer. Sometimes the private lawyer works as a watchdog to assist the
Public Prosecutor in such cases.

Misuse of the Section 498A: After the introduction of this section 498Aof IPC in
1983, there was lots of information on the misuse of this Section. There is a
widespread belief among the Indian public that this provision is used primarily to file
false charges to harass or blackmail an innocent spouse and his relatives.3 The court in
Verrulu v. The state demanded a stop to unhealthy trend of false complaints that had
been resulting in unnecessary misery ti the husband and his relatives4. The Supreme
Court in Sushi Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India5 Writ petition no, 141 of 2005 has
condemned 498 A as “Legal terrorism”. A report published by NCRD informs that in
2006 a total of 1, 61,217 men were registered under section 498 and 304(culpable
homicide not amounting to murder). But surprisingly, the numbers of convictions were
only 16, 995 while the courts found 61, 297 people innocent. Less number of

3 V.K. Dewan, law relating to Dowry Prohibition 184(2010)

4 See Id.
5 AIR 2005 SC 3100
 convictions proves that it is heavily misused. Reports of false complaints are
widespread on this law.

Shocking statistics reveal that more men are falling prey to dowry laws and domestic
violence than women. In inder Raj Vs. Sunita, the Delhi high court and in Krishnan lal
Vs. Union of India (high court of Punjab and Haryana dealt with a challenge to the
constitutional validity of section 498 A on the grounds that it violated the right to
equality under article 14 of the Indian constitution. In both these cases even though the
respective court is successful in establishing that the Section 498 A did not violate the
article 14 of the constitution misuse of this section even by police is widely reported.

According to Manushi, a magazine devoted to gender studies female complainants often

allege threats of dowry demands in complaints of domestic violence or cruelty, even
when dowry is
not an issue.6 If these reports of false claims are accurate, it would constitute an abuse
of due process, for this provision was intended to be shield against violence, not a sword
or bargaining tool.7 Manushis investigations revealed that police would often use the
threat of arrest under section 498A to extort large sums of money from a husband’s
family.8 There is also allegation that lawyers force the complainants to exaggerate the
amount owed to them as stridhan, and lawyers also get large settlements fromtheir
male clients, provided they were entitlements to a percentage of the settlement as a
commission for coercing the husbands family.

NCRB statistics 2005-069, shows altogether 52,483, married men committed suicide
while the figure for women stood at 28,188. BBC study indicates that more than 80%
women under- trials (related to husbands) lodged in Tihar jail (Delhi) are booked under
dowry related laws. National Crime Bureau data from 2008 revealed that the number of
dowry deaths had increased from 6,975 cases in 1998 to 8,093 in 2007.10 Cases
registered under section 498A had also increased from 41.375 to 75. 930 while the

6 Kishwar, destined to fail

7 Majumshar and Kataria , Law of Dowry Prohibition, cruelty and Harassment 94(2010)
8 MadhuKishwaar : laws against domestic violence
9 http://mospi.nic.in/mospi_new/upload/Report_crime_stats_29june11.pdf, accessed on....
10 T.K. Rajalakshmi, Oppressors Case, Womans organizations Rise up Against a petition that seeks an
amendment to section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code, Frontline (March 26-Apr, 8, 2011)
 reported number of sexual harassment cases had grown from 8, 053 to 10,950 in the
same ten-year period.

As IPC 498A is Non-bailable, once the complaint is made the accused is at the
discretion of the magistrate, it is very difficult for the accused to prove his innocence.
A typical case will go on for 3 to 7 years. Even though many a time police will register
a 498A case, they don’t investigate and go on to arrest people because of money to be
made in bribes from both sides. Since bail is at the discretion of magistrates, all sorts of
games will be played by the policeto trap the families, while negotiations go on to
settle the case. The NGO named SAVE Family Foundation is doing ample research
and advocacy on the demerits of this section as a threat to Indian Families.

The monetary compensation is the main motivation for registering false complaints. If a
woman doesn’t like her husband 498A is a convenient tool to get out of marriage and
to entail divorce with monetary benefit. There is a new trend whereby one can file a
complaint and evoke section 498 A to force her husband to settling the divorce with a
huge amount of cash and then get married to her boyfriend. Section 498A is a perfect
tool for extortion to wreak vengeance on husband’s family. It will put her in good
negotiation or a fat settlement and gain custody of the kids if kids are involved. Often
the corrupt and untrained Indian police force dealing a domestic dispute, overburdened
lower courts and non-enforcement of penalties for filing frivolous cases, all will lead to
the failure of the proper implementation of IPC 498A. Hindustan Times also reported
that 498A is even misused to save the hard-core criminals of murders of NitishKatara
case11.

Much ambiguity remains under 498a as a criminal offence in theory and practice:

• Cognizable: The police will register a 498A case since it is required by law, but
they don’t investigate properly and arrest people so that they can take bribes from both
sides.

• Non-Bailable: Since bail is at the discretion of the magistrate, all sorts of games will

11 Hindusthan times : 1st April 2008

be played to have families locked up while negotiations go on to settle the case. This
may happen especially in the cases where the magistrates are allegedly corrupt or, the
public prosecutor and the cops are in cahoots.

• Non-Compoundable: Though 498A is non-compoundable, the courts should allow

the withdrawal of the case when the parties agree to reconcile or settle case. In real
terms, if you pay up, the case goes away and if you don’t you’ll get stuck with a
criminal case that will go on for years.

VIRES OF THE PROVISION:

The vires of Section 498A, IPC was assailed in a Delhi case and the Single Judge was
moved to refer the question of vires to a larger Bench on the ground that in view of S.
4, Dowry Prohibition Act, Section 498A of IPC is violative of Art. 20(2) Constitution
of India providing bar to double jeopardy. The constitutionality of provisions were
against challenged before the Supreme Court under Art.32 on the ground that there is
no prosecution but persecution in these cases and the accuser who are more at fault
than the accused try to take undue advantage of sympathies exhibited by Courts in
matters relating to alleged dowry torture. The Court was also requested to lay down the
guidelines for future cases that whenever false or unfounded cases are brought before
Court stringent action must be taken in order to deter or discourage the persons from
coming to Courts with unclean hands and ulterior motives. The Court held that mere
possibility of abuse of the provision of law per se does not invalidate legislation and
therefore the plea that S.498A has bot legal or constitutional foundation is not
tenable. The

Court further observed that merely because the provision is constitutional and intre
vires, it does not give a license to unscrupulous persons to wreck personal vendetta or
unleash harassment. Pointing out towards responsibility of legislature it was said that it
is for legislature to find out ways how the makers of frivolous complaint and allegation
 can be dealt with12.

There are two debates to this section. One is of the supporters of men’s groups which
states that this section is misused. But when one goes through the allegations made by
such groups we have to understand that it is based on following arguments:
1. One that they are the products of patriarchy and do not believe in getting equality
in the real sense. They pose their argument in a way that women are never
harassed and they are always misusing the law to extract money.
2. The second argument they make is about how everyone should be treated equally
under Art. 14 and 15(2) and hence all the laws made must be gender neutral.
They do not read Art. 15(3) of the Constitution of India where affirmative
action by making special provisions for women and children can be made.

These groups have made no basis of why they say that this law is misused. Even the
Law Commission report No 243 states13 “In course of time, a spate of reports of
misuse of the section by means of false / exaggerated allegations and implication of
several relatives of the husband have been pouring in. Though there are widespread
complaints and even the judiciary has taken cognizance of large scale misuse, there
is no reliable data based on empirical study as regards the extent of the alleged
misuse. There are different versions about it and the percentage of misuse given by
them is based on their experience or ipse dixit, rather than ground level study.”

The second debate is where the women’s groups which include men and women have
been working to emancipate the position of women in the society. These groups are
following the international documents which recognise violence against women. These
groups are of the opinion that what is private is political and hence there must be
protection for women who are facing violence against women. They have relied on the
cases reported in the National Crime Report Bureau (NCRB) and also the cases

12 Sushil Kr. Sharma v UOI, 2005 CrLJ 3439 (SC)

13 Law Commission of India Report no 243 Section 498A IPC August 2012
reported by States. It soon dawned on the women’s groups that there was nothing to
rejoice about S.498A of IPC as it is not a very feasible option for the women to use
because of many reasons. The women do not have access to use this law unless there is a
moral support from family members, friends or NGOs. Approaching the justice delivery
mechanisms like police and court is the last resort for the women. Inspite of this the
women who approach the court are categorised as “home breakers” and brazen. The
hurdles of using the law are many because of the societal norms which do not always
support women who stand up against violence. At this backdrop the provisions under
the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 can prove to be a better
option than S.498A because it creates a space to stop violence. It gives remedies and
support to the woman which encourages the women to fight against domestic violence.

Looking at the recent statistics there in a 3.91% increase in 498A in 2012 as compared
to 2011 but the conviction rate has gone down from 2.15 to 1.85 in 2012 as compared
to 2011. Hence the PWDVA is a better option for the women who are survivors of
Domestic Violence.
Supreme Court Judgments on IPC-498a

1) Satyajit Banerjee and others v. State of West Bengal and others (Supreme Court of
India) Date of Judgment : 23/11/2004Indian Penal Code, ss. 498A, 306 - Trial Court
acquitted accused but High Court set aside acquittal and directed a de novo trial -
Whether High Court isright in directing examination of additional witnesses under s.
311 in revision?; whether direction of High Court to trial court to record further
evidence and take a 'fresh decision from stage one' is without jurisdiction? - Held,
direction for retrial should not be made in all or every case where acquittal of accused
is for want of adequate or reliable evidence - Even if a retrial is directed in exercise of
revisional powers by High Court, evidence already recorded at initial trial cannot be
erased or wiped out from record of case - Trial Judge has to decide case on basis of
evidence already on record and additional evidence which would be recorded on retrial
- Clarified and reiterate that trial Judge, after retrial, shall take a decision on basis of
entire evidence on record and strictly in accordance with law....
 2) RuchiAgarwal v. Amit Kumar Agrawal and Others (Supreme Court of India) (Date
of Judgment: 5/11/2002: Quashing of criminal complaint - Alleging offences under ss.
498A, 323 and 506 IPC, and ss. 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act - Quashing on
ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction - Whether quashing of criminal complaint
sustainable? - Held, that appellant having received relief she wanted without contest on
basis of terms of compromise, cannot now accept argument of appellant - Conduct of
appellant indicates that criminal complaint from which this appeal arises was filed by wife
only to harass respondents - It would be an abuse of process of court if criminal proceedings
from which this appeal arises is allowed
Cruelty:

Section 304-B manages endowment demise being subjected to cold-bloodedness or

provocation by her significant other or any relative of her better half for, or regarding,
any interest for settlement. In any case, the terms has not been characterized in Section
304-B. The clarification to Section 498-A gives the significance of remorselessness and
as given in clarification 'pitilessness' independent from anyone else sums to an offense
and is passable.

Kaliyaperumal vs. State of Tamil Nadu14 it was held that cruelty could be a common
essential in offences beneath each the sections 304B and 498A of IPC. the 2 sections
aren't reciprocally comprehensive however each ar distinct offences associated persons
guiltless beneath section 304B for the offence of dowry death will be guilty for an
offence beneath sec.498A of IPC. The that means of cruelty is given in rationalization to
section 498A. Section 304B doesn't contain its that means however the that means of
cruelty or harassment as given in section 498-A applies in section 304-B further. beneath
section 498- A of IPC cruelty by itself amounts to associate offence whereas beneath
section 304-B the offence is of gift death and therefore the death should have occurred
throughout the course of seven years of wedding. however no such amount is mentioned
in section 498-A.

14 2004 (9) SCC 157; 2004 SCC(Cr) 1417; 2003 AIR(SC) 3828
Inder Raj Malik vs. Sunita Malik15 was command that the word ‗cruelty‘ is outlined
within the clarification that lay to rest alia says that harassment of a girl with a read to
squeeze her or any connected persons to fulfill any unlawful demand for any property or
any valuable security is cruelty

Savagery against Women inside the foundation of marriage represented certain

challenges in issues of arraigning the blamed and demonstrating the blame. This was on
the grounds that, as a general rule, Women bear their sufferings peacefully. Getting free
witnesses is additionally a troublesome errand in light of the fact that the viciousness
against the spouse is by and large delivered inside the four dividers of the house, far from
open look. Further, requests for share and badgering of Women on the off chance that
they neglect to take care of the demand, may not generally be as immediate ambush on
the body of the lady. The brutality is for the most part in subtler and more careful
structures (e.g., mental pitilessness), yet similarly convoluted, numerous a times driving
the lady to take her own particular life.

Keeping in mind the end goal to handle this issue, it was felt by the Parliament that far
reaching administrative changes were required at three levels:

1. To characterize the substantive offense of mercilessness to Women by spouses

and relatives of husbands

2. To present strategies which make examination in instances of specific passing of

Women required

3. To acquire changes the Evidence Act which will make indictment and conviction
of blamed in bodies of evidence for brutality against Women less demanding.

In like manner, Section 498A and area 304B (endowment demise) were added to the IPC.
Area 174, CrPC, was revised making investigations by official justices obligatory in
instances of suicides or suspicious passing of Women inside seven long stretches of their
marriage.

15 1986 (2) Crimes 435; 1986 (92) CRLJ 1510; 1986 RLR 220
Section 113B was added to the Evidence Act, wherein it was given that in the event that
it was demonstrated that soon before the demise of a lady she was subjected to savagery
or badgering by a man regarding interest for endowment, at that point it will be assumed
that such individual who pestered the lady had caused the passing of the lady.

Cruelty by spouse or relatives of husband

The area is just limited to acts or exclusion done by the spouse himself or by his relatives.
The word relatives, be that as it may, has not been characterized in the area. A perusing
of significant case laws uncovers that by and large, the guardians, sisters and siblings i.e.
the close group of the spouse is indicted under this Section.

In Reema Aggarwal v Anupam, it was contended that 'spouse' of the 'second wife', who
weds her amid the subsistence of his prior legitimate marriage, isn't the 'husband' inside
the significance of Section 498A and the 'second wife' , in this manner can't summon area
498A for the cold-bloodedness caused to her by him or his relatives. The Supreme Court,
depending on the authoritative purpose of Section 498A, rejected this dispute.16

Despite the fact that the reality of the matter is that mercilessness is a typical fundamental
to Section 304-B and Section 498-A, the arrangements manage two particular offenses.
Under Section 304-B, it is the 'endowment demise' that is culpable and such passing
ought to have happened inside seven long periods of the marriage. No such period is
specified in Section 498-An and the spouse or his relative would be at risk for subjecting
the lady to 'brutality' whenever after the marriage.

Matrimonial Cruelty in India is a cognizable, non bailable and non compoundable

offence. It is defined in Chapter XXA of I.P.C. under Sec. 498A as:

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 her to
cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to three years
and shall also be liable to a fine.

16Available at:- https://www.legallyindia.com/home/sp-806399172-20110225-1839

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 demands for any property or valuable
security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such
demand.17
The section was enacted to combat the menace of dowry deaths. It was introduced in
the code by the Criminal Law Amendment 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 married woman. The main objective of section 498-A of I.P.C is
to protect a woman who is being harassed by her husband or relatives of husband.

Section 113-A of Indian Evidence Act18, reads as follows:

Sec. 113-A, Presumption as to dowry death- When the question is whether a person has
committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such
woman has been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection
with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the
dowry death.
Explanation- For the purpose of this section ‘dowry death’ shall have the same meaning
as in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).
The object for which section 498A IPC was introduced is amply reflected in the
Statement of Objects and Reasons while enacting Criminal Law (Second Amendment)
Act No. 46 of 1983. As clearly stated therein the increase in number of dowry deaths is a
matter of serious concern. The extent of the evil has been commented upon by the Joint
Committee of the Houses to examine the work of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. In
some of cases, cruelty of the husband and the relatives of the husband which culminate in
suicide by or murder of the helpless woman concerned, which constitute only a small

17 The Indian penal Code, Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, 30th edition reprint 2008,pg. 917
18 The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ,Ratanlal &dhirajlal, 21 st edition reprint 2009,pg. 560
fraction involving such cruelty. Therefore, it was proposed to amend IPC, the Code of
Criminal Procedure,1973 (in short ‘the Cr.P.C’) and the Evidence Act suitably to deal
effectively not only with cases of dowry deaths but also cases of cruelty to married
women by the husband, in- law’s and relatives. The avowed object is to combat the
menace of dowry death and cruelty19.
The act of harassment would amount to cruelty for the purpose of this section. Drinking
and late coming habits of the husband coupled with beating and demanding dowry have
been taken to amount to cruelty within the meaning of this section, but this section has
been held not to include a husband who merely drinks as a matter of routine and comes
home lat20. In a case before Supreme Court it was observed that this section has given a
new dimension to the concept of cruelty for the purposes of matrimonial remedies and
that the type of conduct described here would be relevant for proving cruelty.

Meaning of Cruelty:
It was held in ‘Kaliyaperumal vs. State of Tamil Nadu21’, that cruelty is a common
essential in offences under both the sections 304B and 498A of IPC. The two sections are
not mutually inclusive but both are distinct offences and persons acquitted under section
304B for the offence of dowry death can be convicted for an offence under sec.498A of
IPC. The meaning of cruelty is given in explanation to section 498A. Section 304B does
not contain its meaning but the meaning of cruelty or harassment as given in section 498-
A applies in section 304-B as well. Under section 498-A of IPC cruelty by itself amounts
to an offence whereas under section 304-B the offence is of dowry death and the death
must have occurred during the course of seven years of marriage. But no such period is
mentioned in section 498-A.
In the case of ‘Inder Raj Malik vs. Sunita Malik22’ , it was held that the word ‘cruelty’ is
defined in the explanation which inter alia says that harassment of a woman with a view
to coerce her or any related persons to meet any unlawful demand for any property or any
valuable security is cruelty.

19 Sushil Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India;JT 2005(6) SC266

20 Jagdish Chander vs. State of Haryana,1988 Cr. LJ 1048 (P&H)
21 2004 (9) SCC 157; 2004 SCC(Cr) 1417; 2003 AIR(SC) 3828
22 1986 (2) Crimes 435; 1986 (92) CRLJ 1510; 1986 RLR 220
Kinds of cruelty covered under this section includes following:
(a) Cruelty by vexatious litigation
(b) Cruelty by deprivation and wasteful habits
(c) Cruelty by persistent demand
(d) Cruelty by extra-marital relations
(e) Harassment for non-dowry demand
(f) Cruelty by non-acceptance of baby girl
(g) Cruelty by false attacks on chastity
(h) Taking away children
The presumption of cruelty within the meaning of section 113-A, Evidence Act,1872 also
arose making the husband guilty of abetment of suicide within the meaning of section
306 where the husband had illicit relationship with another woman and used to beat his
wife making it a persistent cruelty within the meaning of Explanation (a) of section 498-
A.
Constitution Validity of Section 498-A
In ‘Inder Raj Malik and others vs. Mrs. Sumita Malik23’, it was contended that this
section is ultra vires Article 14 and Article 20 (2) of the Constitution. There is the Dowry
Prohibition Act which also deals with similar types of cases; therefore, both statutes
together create a situation commonly known as double jeopardy. But Delhi High Court
negatives this contention and held that this section does not create situation for double
jeopardy. Section 498-A is distinguishable from section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act
because in the latter mere demand of dowry is punishable and existence of element of
cruelty is not necessary, whereas section 498-A deals with aggravated form of the
offence. It punishes such demands of property or valuable security from the wife or her
relatives as are coupled with cruelty to her. Hence a person can be prosecuted in respect
of both the offences punishable under section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and this
section.
This section gives wide discretion to the courts in the matters of interpretation of the
words occurring in the laws and also in matters of awarding punishment. This provision
is not ultra vires. It does not confer arbitrary powers on courts.

23 Ibid.
In the leading case of ‘Wazir Chand vs. State of Harya24’, involving the death by
burning of a newly married woman, the circumstances did not establish either murder or
an abetted suicide and thus in-laws escaped the jaws of section 300 and 306, but they
were caught in the web of this newly enacted section for prevention of harassment for
dowry. Not to speak of the things they are persistently demanding from the girl’s side, the
fact that a large number of articles were taken by her father after her death from her
matrimonial abode showed that there was pressure being exerted on-in laws and
continued to be exerted till death for more money and articles.
With the rise in modernisation, education, financial security and the new found
independence the radical feminist has made 498A a weapon in her hands. Many a hapless
husbands and in laws have become victims of their vengeful daughter-in-laws. Most
cases where Sec 498A is invoked turn out to be false (as repeatedly accepted by High
Courts and Supreme Court in India) as they are mere blackmail attempts by the wife (or
her close relatives) when faced with a strained marriage. In most cases 498A complaint is
followed by the demand of huge amount of money (extortion) to settle the case out of the
court.
Sec 498A and the Allegation of Misuse:
In the last 20 years of criminal law reform a common argument made against laws
relating to violence against women in India has been that women misuse these laws. The
police, civil society, politicians and even judges of the High Courts and Supreme Court
have offered these arguments of the "misuse' of laws vehemently. The allegation of
misuse is made particularly against Sec 498A of the IPC and against the offence of dowry
death in Sec 304B. One such view was expressed by former Justice K T Thomas in his
article titled 'Women and the Law', which appeared in The Hindu.21 The 2003 Malimath
Committee report on reforms in the criminal justice system also notes, significantly, that
there is a "general complaint" that Sec 498A of the IPC is subject to gross misuse; it uses
this as justification to suggest an amendment to the provision, but provides no data to
indicate how frequently the section is being misused. It is important therefore that such
"arguments" are responded to, so as to put forth a clearer picture of the present factual
status of the effect of several criminal laws enacted to protect women.

24 1989 SCC(Cr) 105; 1989 (1) SCC 244; 1989 AIR(SC) 378; 1989 (1) Crimes 173; 1989 (95) CRLJ 809
Domestic violence and abuse by spouses and family members are complex behaviours
and the social organisation of courts, the police and legal cultures systematically tend to
devalue domestic violence cases. Sec 498A was introduced in the IPC in 1983 and the
reforms of the past 20 years have not been adequately evaluated at all by the government
with respect to their deterrence goals, despite the institutionalization of law and policy to
criminalise domestic violence. A program of research and development is urgently
required to advance the current state of knowledge on the effects of legal sanctions on
domestic violence. The narrow or perhaps almost negligible study done by law
enforcement agencies about the deterrent effects of legal sanctions for domestic violence
stands in high contrast with the extensive efforts of activists, victim advocates and
criminal justice practitioners in mobilising law and shaping policy to stop domestic
violence. It is important to do these studies to correct the general misconceptions that
women are misusing the law by filing false cases against their husbands and in-laws in
order to harass them and get them convicted. The perspective of the state and its agencies
needs to change from that of protecting the husbands and in-laws against potential
"misuse" of the laws of domestic violence to that of implementing their real purpose – to
recognise that such violence is a crime and protect women who have the courage to file
complaints against their abusers.
Article 15 of Indian Constitution
Article 15 of the Constitution prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste,
sex or place of birth. However, it allows special provisions for women and children.
Article 21A provides for free and compulsory education to all children from the ages of
six to 14 years. Article 24 prohibits employment of children below 14 years in mines,
factories or any other hazardous employment. The court also took note of Article 14
guaranteeing equality, and Article 21 providing that a person cannot be deprived of life
and liberty except according to procedure established by the law. Similarly, Article 23
prohibiting human trafficking and forced labour was also referred to in the court’s
judgment.
Moving away from fundamental rights to the directive principles, the court pressed into
service provisions relating to the health of women and children. Article 39(f) directs the
State to ensure that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy
manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity, and that childhood and youth are
protected against exploitation and moral and material abandonment. Article 42 directs the
State to make provisions for just and humane conditions of work, and maternity beliefs.
Article 45 stipulates that the State shall provide early childhood care and education for all
children until the age of six. Article 47 lays down the raising of level of nutrition and
standard of living of people, and improvement of public health as a primary duty of the
State.
This section tries to maintain that every married woman needs to be given due
respect and treated with care. It reinforces the fact that a woman is not a toy to be played
with, to be thrown away at one’s whims and fancies and treated as inferior to any other. It
inherently asks for husbands to treat their wives well and not misbehave or demand
unjustly which in a way sends forth a message that a woman is a commodity for sale.
What section 498A IPC tries to do is prevent and punish the above act and re-assert a
woman’s
right to live a peaceful and happy life.

Use of Section 498 A by Indian Courts:

Indian Courts had been using this provision to safeguard the women from facing the
cruelty faced by them at their matrimonial home.
9 out of 10 of the cases are always related to dowry, wherein the woman is continuously
threatened for want of more money and property which if remains unfulfilled , the
married woman is tortured, threatened, abused- both physically and verbally and
harassed. Like in the case of Ram Kishan Jain &Ors v State of Madhya Pradesh25due to
insufficiency of dowry demands the woman was administered calmpose tablets and
thereafter she even cut the arteries of both her hands. Sometimes, dowry may not be the
cause but the woman for several reasons like her complexion or family status is tortured
to death.
In the case of Surajmal Banthia & Anr. v. State of West Bengal26, the deceased was ill-
treated and tortured for several days and even not given food several times. Her father-

25 II (2000) DMC 628

26 II (2003) DMC 546 (DB)
in-law also misbehaved with her quite often. This is the treatment that several young
brides face when they move out of their parents’ home and into the house of her in-laws’.
It is the duty of the court to prevent any of these abusers from escaping. The increasing
rate of bride burning for want of more dowry and brutal torture of young wives, together
with a clear escape of the abuser is a clear indication that the court has not taken any
strong measures for the implementation of S. 498A IPC properly.
As stated earlier many a times this victim turns into the abuser and is clearly not wronged
but instead wrongs the husband and his family for no fault of theirs. Several cases show
that the married woman takes advantage of the section and sends the respondents to jail
under the ambit of this section.
Many women rights’ groups justify the abuse of this section as being a common feature
with all other laws and that also the ratio of false cases to that of true ones as being very
low. But this still does not change the truth that there is slowly a rise in the abuse of
S.498A IPC.
In many judgments, the court has not considered mental cruelty caused to the woman but
has concentrated only on any sign of physical cruelty. If evidence does not show that the
woman was physically harassed, then the court does not look into the case. What the
court does is call the woman hyper- sensitive27 or of low tolerance level and having an
unstable mind28.
Also S.498A IPC does not only deal with dowry deaths but also any willful conduct on
part of the husband which causes harm to the wife’s ‘ life, limb or health (whether mental
or physical).’To prove that cruelty was caused under Explanation a) of S.498A IPC it is
not important to show or put forth that the woman was beaten up- abusing her verbally,
denying her conjugal rights or even not speaking to her properly29 would fall into the
ambit of mental cruelty.
Showing any mercy to abusers or giving them the ‘benefit of doubt’ when some proof to
torture at their hands is present is completely wrong. Like in the case ofAshok Batra &
Ors v State30even though letters of the deceased stating that harassment had taken place

27 State of Maharshtra v Jaiprakash Krishna Mangaonkar & Ors II(2003) DMC 384
28 Annapurnabai @Bhoori v State of MP I (2000)DMC 699
29 Ramesh Dalaji Godad v State of Gujarat II (2004) DMC 124
30 I (2003) DMC 287
was present, not treating them as strong evidence and giving the appellants a benefit of
doubt without ordering for a further investigation into the matter is wrong.
The judges have in several instances made a very narrow interpretation of this section,
considering it to be only cruelty in relation to unlawful demands or dowry demands. In a
particular case, the court went to the extent of stating that ‘merely because her in-laws or
husband were to chastise the woman for improper or immoral conduct, it does not
necessarily amount to cruelty31’ This act of chastising the woman clearly amounts to
mental cruelty, something that the court apparently failed to notice. Here, considering the
woman to be a hyper- sensitive woman not used to usual wear and tear of social life is
completely erroneous.
In the case of Bomma Ilaiah v State of AP32 the husband of the complainant tortured the
woman physically by forcing his wife to have sexual intercourse with him. He inserted
his fingers and a stick in her vagina, causing severe pains and bleeding but the court
found the husband of this Woman guilty only under S. 325 IPC and not S, 498A IPC.
Why? Her life both physically and Mentally was at risk. Didn’t the court notice this?
The court has in another case not punished the guilty under S.498A IPC even though
medical Reports clearly showed that the death was homicidal by throttling. This was
simply because According to the court, even though there were dowry demands in the
past, the court felt that Proximity of the death to be caused due to such a demand was
unlikely33. Who decides this Proximity? The cause and its effect on the woman’s health
or life may be profound and even cause her mental unrest at a later stage.
While on the on hand, women’s emancipation is the need of the hour and prevention of
ever increasing dowry deaths and harassment needs to be stopped, it is also clearly
noticed that women today are still tortured and often the court, being the ultimate savior
also does not come to the rescue to protect these women.

Misuse of Section 498 A in Modern World:

31 U.Subba Rao & Ors v State of Karnataka II (2003) DMC 102; Umesh Kumar Shah &Ors v State of
Bihar I (2004) DMC 260
32 II (2003) DMC 461
33 Ravinder Bhagwan Todkar & Ors v State of Maharashtra & Ors I (2004) DMC 791 (DB)
A violation of this section, its goals and its aims is on the rise with the woman
frivolously making false allegations against their husbands with the purpose of getting rid
of them or simply hurting the family.
The abuse of this section is rapidly increasing and the women often well- educated know
that this section is both cognizable and non-bailable and impromptu works on the
complaint of the woman and placing the man behind bars.
Like in the case of Savitri Devi v Ramesh Chand & Ors34, the court held clearly that
there was a misuse and exploitation of the provisions to such an extent that it was hitting
at the foundation of marriage itself and proved to be not so good for health of society at
large. The court believed that authorities and lawmakers had to review the situation and
legal provisions to prevent such from taking place.
This section was made keeping in mind protection of the married woman from
unscrupulous husbands but is clearly misused by few women and again this is strictly
condemned in Saritha v R. Ramachandran35 where the court did notice that the reverse
trend and asked the law Commission and Parliament to make the offence a non-
cognizable and bailable one. It is been a duty of the court to condemn wrongdoings and
protect the victim but what happens when the victim turns into the abuser? What remedy
does the husband have here?
On this ground, the woman gets to divorce her husband and re-marry or even gain money
in the form of compensation.
Many women rights’ groups go against the idea of making the offence a non-cognizable
and bailable one thinking that this gives the accused a chance to escape conviction. But
what this would do is that it would give a fair chance to the man and above all help meet
the ends of justice. Justice must protect the weaker and ensure that the wronged is given a
chance to claim back his/her due.
When women accuse their husbands under S.498A IPC by making the offence non-
bailable and recognizable , if the man is innocent he does not get a chance quickly to get
justice and ‘justice delayed is justice denied’. Therefore, the lawmakers must suggest

34 II (2003) DMC 328

35 I (2003) DMC 37 (DB)
some way of making this section non-biased to any individual such that the guilty is
punished and the person wronged is given justice.
The position of the women in India is still bad. They still need rights to alleviate
themselves in society but many a times fail to notice others’ rights as long as their rights
are ensured. The educated woman of today must agree with the mantra of equality and
demand the same but the trend is slowly getting reversed. Women are taking due
advantage of the fact that they are referred to as the ‘weaker sex’ and on the foundation
of rights ensured to them are violating others’ rights.
 CHAPTER 2

HISTORY, STRUCTURE AND LEGAL FRAME WORK

1.1 Historical background

The beginning of nineteenth century assumes a critical part in corrupting Indian Women
till its profundity. The dread of instability conceived in unmarried young girls as well as
married. Most situations where Sec 498A is summoned end up being false as they are
minor shakedown endeavors by the spouse when looked with a stressed marriage. Much
of the time 498acomplaint is trailed by the request of colossal measure of cash
(blackmail) to settle the case out of the court.

Women are not conceived, but rather made. What superior to India to represent this
announcement by Simone de Beauvoir. With the entire world observing International
Women's Day with incredible pageantry and show, it would be just adept to break down
the position and space Indian Women possess today, and contrasting it with the time 60
years back when the nation had recently picked up freedom. With them taking an interest
in patriot developments, to being pushed into the local family unit space, to their
resurgence as super-women today, and our nation they have seen everything. 36

In ancient period settlement was not a wrongdoing. It is only a method for offering
endowments to the little girl by their folks. By giving endowment too the prep the
guardians of girl expect that her little girl will be sheltered and carry on with a cheerfully
life to their wedding house. Share is likewise a legitimate ethic for marriage in an old
period. Settlement is fundamentally begun by the time of lords and kingdoms amid their
run the show. The high position individuals or rich individuals began the conventions
share in our general public essentially in Hindu's. In the old time, it was begun with the
idea of giving any property or profitable security with their own particular readiness

36 https://www.youthkiawaaz.com
however gradually and relentlessly it transformed into a method for tormenting the lady's
family as the prepare's family begun requesting for endowment.

The general population currently confronting numerous issues with respect to endowment
idea, in light of the fact that the prepare were following this idea like a business. They
wed with a young lady and requesting lum aggregate measure of settlement. After that
they cleared out the young lady or to influence her pass on or they to murder her by
giving a few reasons than again the prepare remarry with another lady of the hour. This
idea was absolutely extortion and there were no laws around then. The legislature of
India at last propelled against share laws by occurring of such huge numbers of cases
named Dowry Prohibition Act 1961.By laying this demonstration, the idea of settlement
is thoroughly get ceased and restricted. This law has passed initially on specific states
after that all finished India. The giving and accepting of endowment is currently
wrongdoing whether specifically or by implication. This law is confined just for the
assurance of lady of the hour amid society. The endowment preclusion act has settled the
punishments and disciplines for the general population who were requesting share. By
this demonstration, the idea of settlement is halted however not completely. This
demonstration helps the lady and their folks for not giving the endowment and make a
cheerfully marriage life.

Section 498A Indian Penal Code 1860, embed against the remorselessness caused by in-
law with the Women because of the need of endowment. This area were came to shield
the Women from their spouses and their in-laws. It was watched that before
implementation of this area 498A the young Women were torment and badgering by the
spouse and her in-laws. Because of unfulfillment of their imagining requests, cash after
the marriage. There are numerous instances of settlement passing’s and young Women
have endured. To shield them from their significant other and their in-laws, Section 498A
implemented. So the endowment passing ought to be halted. 37

Prior to this Section 498A of IPC 1860, there is a Section 304B under IPC 1860, in
particular "Endowment Death" for the advantage or shield of Women from sick impact of

37 Section 2 of Dowry Prohibition Act 1961

settlement. In any case, it was seen that this area isn't adequate to defend the Women
from sick impact of settlement and by badgering experiences spouse and their in-laws.
This is one of the motivation to dispatch or change Section 498a under IPC 1860.
Remorselessness incorporates both physical and mental torment. Determined lead in
Explanation (a) to area 498A, I.P.C. 38 can be surmised from immediate and backhanded
confirmation. The word savagery in the Explanation condition joined to the area has been
given a more extensive importance.

The Supreme Court, in Mohd. Hoshan versus Territory of A.P.2 watched: "Regardless of
whether one companion has been liable of pitilessness to the next is basically an issue of
reality.39 The effect of objections, allegation or insults on a man adding up to
remorselessness relies upon different variables like the affectability of the casualty
concerned, the social foundation, nature, instruction and so forth. Further, mental
pitilessness differs from individual to individual contingent upon the force of the
affectability, level of strength and perseverance to withstand such remorselessness. Each
case must be chosen its own actualities whether mental cold-bloodedness is made out"

The importance of cold-bloodedness inside Section 498A, when the spouse or his family
torment or irritated the wife for endowment or give any psychological or physical hurt to
her or any confusion everything goes under the brutality. The importance of cold-
bloodedness additionally emerged in an area 113B of Evidence Act 1872, that when any
share demise occurred because of the requests by the spouse and his family to the wife or
make her give mental unsettling influence or any kind of hurt either physical or mental.

Area 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act discusses punishment for requesting settlement
which is detainment of least a half year which may stretch out up to 2 years and fine up to
Rs. 10000/ - . The Section is Gender unbiased i.e. it's relevant to any individual who
request share from the guardians, different relatives or gatekeeper of the lady of the hour
or the groom. In any case, tact is given to the Judicial Officer to force a sentence of under
a half year however relying on the prerequisite that he needs to specify the explanations
behind forcing a sentence of under a half year in his judgment.

38 2002 Cr.L.J 4124

39 1986 (2) Crimes 435; 1986 (92) CRLJ 1510; 1986 RLR 220 Crimes 173; 1989 (95) CRLJ 809
Pitilessness as indicated by the area implies any tenacious direct which is probably going
to drive the lady to submit suicide or to make grave damage or threat life, appendage or
health(whether mental or physical) or provocation of a lady with a view to forcing her or
any individual identified with her to take care of any unlawful demand for any property
or important security or the badgering is by spouse or the relative of the husband is a
result of the disappointment by the lady or any individual identified with her to take care
of such a demand. In this way, the Section is unequivocally sexual orientation one-sided
for the more pleasant sex. Though, Section 4 of DP Act characterizes a solitary offense,
pitilessness under Section 498A may take into its ambit number of offenses which might
be attack, battery, slander, character death, et al.

Share forbiddance act authorize to stop the endowment idea in a marriage. What's more,
in that there is a different laws which tie the accepting and giving of endowment. There is
a strict discipline for requesting share and for giving too. There is a Section called weight
of evidence its a vital area of share disallowance act which demonstrate the genuine
legitimacy of this demonstration Section 498A IPC made to shield the Women from their
better half and their in-laws. This area causes the young lady to make due in their
maternal homes. This area made strict discipline for the spouse and their in-laws and
make an immediate arrestment in the wake of whining by the wife. This area encourages
the Women to battle with their better half and their in-laws.

There have been endless discussions about sex in India throughout the years. Quite a bit
of it incorporates Women' placing in the public eye, their instruction, wellbeing, financial
position, sexual orientation correspondence and so on. What one can close from such
exchanges is that Women have constantly held a specific dumbfounding position in our
creating nation.

While on one hand, India has seen an expanded level of proficiency among Women, and
Women are currently entering proficient fields, the acts of female child murder, weakness
conditions and absence of training as yet holding on still proceed. Indeed, even the man
centric belief system of the house being a lady's 'genuine area' and marriage being her
definitive predetermination hasn't changed much. The marital commercials, requesting
young Women of a similar rank, with reasonable skin and thin figure, or the much
scrutinized reasonable and exquisite promotions, are markers of the moderate changing
social mores. On the off chance that one takes a gander at the status of Women at that
point and now, one needs to take a gander at two sides of the coin; one side which is
promising, and one side which is somber.

At the point when our nation got its freedom, the interest of Women patriots was
generally recognized. At the point when the Indian Constitution was planned, it allowed
measure up to rights to Women, thinking of them as legitimate nationals of the nation and
as an equivalent to men as far as flexibility and opportunity. The sex proportion of
Women as of now was somewhat superior to anything what it is today, remaining at 945
females for every 1000 guys. However the state of Women shouted an alternate reality.

They were consigned to the family, and made to submit to the male-ruled male centric
culture, as has dependably been common in our nation. Indian Women, who battled as
equivalents with men in the patriot battle, were not given that free open space any longer.
They moved toward becoming homemakers, and were for the most part intended to
fabricate a solid home to help their men who were to construct the recently autonomous
nation. Women were diminished to being peons. The national female education rate was
an alarmingly low 8.6%. The Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER) for young Women was
24.8% at essential level and 4.6%40 at the upper essential level (in the 11-14 years age
gathering). There existed insoluble social and social hindrances to instruction of Women
and access to composed tutoring.

A not very many were permitted into people in general space, which she was relied upon
to oversee individually, while keeping up her local part as a homemaker. Despite the
Sharda Act which was passed in the 1950s to raise the conjugal age constrain for young
Women, kid marriage especially in North India was very common however the normal
age at marriage for females was expanded to 18. Sprawling imbalances persevered in
their entrance to training, medicinal services, physical and budgetary assets and openings

40 Ibid
in political, social and social circles. It was relatively unbelievable for Women to have a
decision or a say in issues of marriage, profession or life. Or maybe she had no voice by
any means. The act of share was as regular as ever.

Furthermore, since men were preferable instructed over young Women, the requests were
much more. The Dowry Prohibition Act was at last gone in 1961, 41 to secure Women and
promising extreme discipline, however the conviction rate of wrongdoing against Women
was, and still is low in India. In view of such cruel practices which were standardized by
our general public, the introduction of the young lady kid was viewed as unfavorable. In
towns and additionally urban communities, the young lady youngster was executed either
before birth or after it. Indeed, even till date, the training proceeds. The United Nations
Children's Fund, assessed that up to 50 million young Women and Women are 'missing'
from India's populace in light of end of the female hatchling or high mortality of the
young lady youngster because of absence of legitimate care.

Despite the fact that various established alterations were made for Women' social,
monetary and political advantages, yet they were never successful to get a radical change
the circumstance. Women had just the part of a 'decent spouse' to play, and if a lady
wandered out to work, she was viewed as an awful lady, conflicting with societal
standards. Women were relied upon to cook sustenance and eat simply after the men,
with whatever small measure of nourishment is cleared out. This prompted widespread
hunger among Women, and a to a great degree weakness status. Around 500 Women
were accounted for to kick the bucket each day because of pregnancy related issues
because of ailing health, and getting hitched before 18. It was just by the 1960s, that a
couple of taught Women started to see themselves progressively change from a simple
gatekeeper of home to a true blue member in the talk of life. The nation saw the primary
undercurrent of female discontent with the framework. 42

With time, a great deal has changed since those dim periods of the 1950s for the Women.
In spite of the fact that at a few levels like share, violations like assault, lewd behavior at
office or open spots, and attack, eve-prodding, even after more than sixty long periods of

41 www.cyberabadpolice.gov.in/information/PDF/acts-laws/act-dowry.pdf
42 ibdi
freedom Women are as yet misused, which is the despicable side of our nation. However
one can't deny that the circumstance has enhanced since the before times. Women, who
presently speak to 48.2% of the populace, are gaining admittance to training, and after
that work. From 5.4 million young Women enlisted at the essential level in 1950-51 to
61.1 million young Women in 2004-05. At the upper essential level, the enrolment
expanded from 0.5 million young Women to 22.7 million young Women.

Dropout rates for young Women have fallen by 16.5% between the year 2000 and 2005.
Projects like 'Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan' and 'Saakshar Bharat Mission for Female Literacy'
has helped increment the education rates from under 10 percent to over half today. The
aftereffect of this is India has world's biggest number of professionally qualified Women.
Truth be told India has the biggest populace of working Women on the planet, and has
more number of specialists, specialists, researchers, educators than the United States.

Women in India gradually began perceiving her actual potential. She has begun
scrutinizing the standards set down for her by the general public. Subsequently, she has
begun breaking obstructions and earned a respectable position on the planet. Today
Indian Women have exceeded expectations in every last field from social work to visiting
space station. There is no field, which stays unconquered by Indian Women. Regardless
of whether it is governmental issues, sports, amusement, writing, innovation all over, its
Women control from the start.43

Today names like Arundhati Roy, Anita Desai, Kiran Desai, Shobhaa De, Jhumpa Lahiri
can put some other essayist to disgrace. In the field of silver screen, Women like Rekha,
Smita Patil, Shabana Aazmi and Vidya Balan and Konkona Sen are such names who
don't assume feminized parts, yet have championed themselves over this male-
overwhelmed domain. In the field of Politics, from Indira Gandhi to Shiela Dixit, Uma
Bharti, Jayalalithaa, Vasundhra Raje and Mamata Banerjee today, Women are making
their quality felt.

Today, the advanced lady is so deft and independent that she can be effectively called a
superwoman, juggling numerous fronts without any help. Women are currently savagely

43 ibdi
yearning and are demonstrating their metal on the home front, as well as in their
particular callings. Women in Indian are coming up in all circles of life. They are joining
the colleges and schools in extensive numbers. They are going into a wide range of
callings like designing, prescription, legislative issues, instructing, and so forth. A
country's advance and flourishing can be judged by the manner in which it treats its
Women society. There is a gradual mindfulness with respect to giving the Women their
contribution, and not abusing them, considering them to be objects of ownership.
Notwithstanding progress, the plain certainty that Women, alongside being achievers,
additionally are required to satisfy their parts as spouses or moms, organizing home
against whatever else.44

This perspective hasn't changed much. There is as yet a huge Section of Women who are
uneducated, and offered before the age of 18. Families are required to supply a virtuous
girl to the group of her future spouse. Likewise not very many Women are really utilized
in great paying occupations, and thus guardians don't see the purpose of burning through
cash on young Women' training. Insights say that near 245 million Indian Women do not
have the fundamental ability to peruse and compose, which is a vast number. Just 13.9%
Women are utilized in the urban area, and 29% in the residential and farming part, where
too a greater part of Women are abused by the men. The sex proportion of India
demonstrates that the Indian culture is as yet partial against female, and a great deal is yet
to be accomplished in this specific circumstance.

The way towards add up to sexual orientation strengthening is brimming with potholes.
Throughout the years, Women have made extraordinary walks in numerous zones with
remarkable advance in diminishing some sexual orientation holes. However substances,
for example, 11,332 Women and young Women getting trafficked each year, and
expanded routine with regards to settlement, assault and lewd behavior hit hard against
all the advancement that has occurred. In this manner, if on one hand Women are
climbing the stepping stool of achievement, then again she is mutely enduring the
viciousness beset without anyone else relatives. When contrasted with the past, Women
in present day times have accomplished a great deal however as a general rule they need

44 http://www.managejournal.com/
to even now travel far. Women may have left the anchored areas of their home, yet a
brutal, unfeeling, exploitative world anticipates them, where Women need to demonstrate
their ability against the world who consider Women to be just vassals of delivering
youngsters. The Indian lady needs to advance through all the mingled biases against her,
and the men yet need to permit and acknowledge the Women to be equivalent members
in the nation's way forward.

The misuse of lady started with the tyke marriage. A young lady excessively youthful,
making it impossible to consider life important, a young lady excessively youthful,
making it impossible to comprehend the significance of „life‟ and „marriage‟, needed to
venture into the universe of thistles. She was subjudicated by her relative and different
individuals from her husband’s family, more often than excluding even her significant
other. She was relied upon to observe, purdah‟, not to address senior citizens, talk in low
voice to more youthful individuals from family, not to talk or meet her significant other
with the exception of midnight and bear every single unforgiving word and sufferings for
even minor blame or more all never to express her distresses or articulate an expression
of misery to anyone. A lady had no flexibility, neither individual nor financial.
Customarily, the Hindu lady had particular monetary right called, stridhan‟.

Keeping in mind the end goal to incompletely set off the incapacity endured under the
idea of joint possession by male individuals, the smritikars allocated an uncommon
classification of property to Women named as „stridhana‟.

The primary specify of this term is found in Gautama Dharma sutra. He give d to the
women’s isolate property as well as unmistakable and separate tenets for its progression.
In any case, the meaning of „stridhana‟ changed over now and again, allowing every one
of the rights and capacity to spouses. Assent of the young lady was not thought to be
significant and henceforth, she was left with no decision, but to acknowledge all agonies
and marry. The customary idea of marriage has extraordinarily changed and Hindu
marriage is thought to be of double nature i.e. of both religious holy observance and
contract, where common assent and advantage of both the gatherings are appropriately
helped by various lawful arrangements and changes. Endeavors to realize changes in the
status of Women either through enactment or legal activism can make little progress
without a concurrent development to change the social and monetary structures and the
way of life (qualities, belief systems and mentalities) of society. 45

One of those endeavors to acquire changes status of Women and assuage her from her
sufferings, torments and miserable condition is given under part XX-An of Indian Penal
Code, 1860.The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was corrected in the year 1983 to incorporate
the arrangements of Section 498 A which manages the discipline of the spouse and his
relatives if a wedded Women is subjected to remorselessness which is probably going to
drive a lady to submit suicide or cause grave physical or mental damage to her, and
badgering with a view to constraining her or any of her relatives to meet any unlawful
requests of property. The offense is cognizable, non-bailable and non-compoundable.
Thus once a grumbling is held up on the previously mentioned grounds the blamed has a
considerable measure to hold up under. With the ascent in modernization, instruction,
budgetary security and the newly discovered freedom the radical women's activist has
made 498A a weapon in her hands. Numerous a hapless spouses and in laws have
progressed toward becoming casualties of their vindictive little girl in-laws. Most
situations where Sec 498A is summoned end up being false as they are simple shakedown
endeavors by the spouse when looked with a stressed marriage. By and large
498acomplaint is trailed by the request of colossal measure of cash (blackmail) to settle
the case out of the court. Kanaraj versus Province of Punjab, 2000 Cri LJ 2993 the zenith
court saw as: "for the blame of the spouse the in-laws or different relatives can't in all
cases be held to be included. The demonstrations ascribed to such people must be
demonstrated past sensible uncertainty and they can't observed mindful by simple guesses
and suggestions. The propensity to rope in relatives of the spouse as blamed must be
controlled" Karnataka High Court, on account of State Vs. Srikanth, 2002 CriLJ 3605
saw as: "Reserving in of the entire of the family incorporating siblings and sisters-in-law
needs to be depreciated except if there is a particular material against these people, it is
down ideal with respect to the police to incorporate the entire of the family as
denounced"

45 http://www.academia.edu/
LEGAL STRUCTURE

No general public approves viciousness all alone individuals, in particular on Women.

However brutality has been a consistent component in Women' lives and endeavors to
manage it have differed yet essentially from a philanthropic point of view. The third
period of the Women's Movement, in the early piece of the 1980s, started crusades
against assault, spouse battering and endowment murders which put the issue of
viciousness against Women on the political plan. This started the way toward ending the
quietness around viciousness as an individual issue and a few associations, including
political gatherings, dissented, requested authoritative changes and set up gatherings,
asylums and offices for Women who were casualties of sexual or aggressive behavior at
home. The primary administrative change to rise up out of this political cognizance and
challenge of Women was an altered law for assault. The second came in light of the
disturbing ascent in endowment passing or the baffling 'suicides' or 'the stove mischances'
of youthful hitched Women. In July 1983, the Home Affairs Ministry set forward
alterations in three distinct Acts i.e. Area 113 An of the Indian Evidence Act, Section 498
An of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 174,176 and 198 An of the Criminal Procedure
Code.

This was a stage forward for the crusade against brutality on Women particularly in the
territory of aggressive behavior at home. It ended up one of only a handful couple of
arrangements in the Constitution which perceives that male individuals from the conjugal
family can propagate viciousness.

The prologue to Section 498 A states, "Customarily, the lady is subjected to the impulses
and eccentricities of the man particularly in the connection amongst a couple. Cold-
bloodedness which makes the lady's presence horrendous was not culpable (till as of
late). On the off chance that the spouse submitted suicide, the liable got away discipline
for need of a satisfactory arrangement."

It additionally finished the purported sacredness of the home and brought "the private"
beyond any confining influence by bringing it inside the legitimate domain. Particularly it
perceived that there could be different causes behind 'suicides' and made cold-
bloodedness a cognisable and non-bailable offense. Notwithstanding, it was anything but
a complete enactment and did exclude spouse battering and different types of brutality in
both the marital and natal homes. The Dowry Prohibition [Amendment] Act, 1984, was
planned to make the law more viable through redefinition, alteration and stringency. Be
that as it may, it has neglected to go about as a viable instrument as not by any means a
bunch of people have been sentenced.

The issue of brutality against Women is full of exceptional issues. There is the quietness,
taboos and social shame of battered and abused Women. The Women's Movement,
concerned people and different associations are battling for laws which are great for
Women. Their execution through the police and legal present an alternate nature of issues
and biases. Furthermore, there are those voices which, as a result of social conservatism,
conservative impact or personal stake, might want to switch any dynamic move. Like in
many developments for change which conflict with the overwhelming stream of social
reasoning and practices, the crusade against brutality against Women has not been
simple. This booklet is a little commitment to this progressing battle. It will take a gander
at the Indian Penal Code [IPC] Section 498A, its arrangements, the discussion around its
utilization and abuse, in view of information accumulated from battered Women
themselves.

Definition

Area 498 An of the Criminal Procedure Code was acquainted in 1983 making pitilessness
with a wedded lady a wrongdoing. It widened the extent of the term aggressive behavior
at home and expresses that: "Whoever being the spouse or the relative of the husband of a
lady, subjects such lady to pitilessness will be rebuffed with detainment for a term, which
may stretch out to three years and will likewise be at risk to fine." For the reasons for this
area, "Brutality" implies— an) any adamant lead which is of such a nature as is probably
going to drive the lady to submit suicide or to make grave damage or peril life,
appendage or wellbeing (regardless of whether mental or physical) of the lady: or
b) badgering of the lady where such provocation is with a view to constraining her or any
individual identified with her to take care of any unlawful demand for any property or
profitable security or is by virtue of disappointment by her or any individual identified
with her to take care of such demand."

This area manages that a court can take cognisance of any offense culpable under this
Section just upon a protest made by the individual oppressed by the offense, or by her
relatives. It is cognisable and the non-bailable.

Section 498 an of the IPC made brutality executed by the spouse or in-laws a cognisable
offense. It was pointed as an obstacle to conjugal brutality by empowering the lady to
make preventive move before it prompted her passing. The law punishes the culprits with
a jail term which may stretch out to three years as well as a fine. It additionally makes it
compulsory for the police to capture the denounced spouse or in-laws quickly after an
objection is enlisted.

Legitimate Provisions Relating to Women and their Misuse

The law is decidedly one-sided towards Women, from the accessibility of reservations to
the protected arrangements. The laws with respect to mishandle of Women extending
from sexual to monetary does not recognize the manhandle that a man faces,
demonstrating a divergence in the legitimate framework. Yet Women are the more
noteworthy number of casualties contrasted with men, that measurement is gradually
disseminating in the light of false affirmations against guiltless men. The rate of false
charges after the aftermath of a marriage, after a lady feels hated, is ceaselessly on the
ascent in India. The law, and legal framework doesn't give insurance of men from these
disgracing assertions prompting uncommon measures as suicide.

On social media, videos show females may misunderstand an accidental brush of the
shoulder as eve-teasing, and some may go as far as purposely scaring a man that if he
doesn’t pay money she will take him to jail regarding the same. Some women have
started using extortion in many forms, the end result is to be provided money. Under the
Marriage Amendment Act (2000) a woman is to be paid maintenance after her divorce
from her husband, highly educated women tend to hide that they are currently employed
yet still demand maintenance. If not provided then the husband can face criminal
indictment.

The statute of limitations for filing a complaint of dowry does not exist, so even after 20
years of marriage a wife can file a case of dowry on her husband and family. Albeit this
may seem to be a women-friendly provision, it is too friendly. The wife does not have to
provide proof of giving dowry and the husband has no means of proving his innocence,
he is deemed guilty without a trial or hearing. There have been reports where a female
has filed an FIR on the entire family, including a 2 month old infant. The abuse of a
system which was amended to protect and provide for women has been turned into a
battleground for revenge.

While going through a divorce the greatest difficulty lies in who the child will stay with,
the mother or father. Our cultural wisdom would tell us that a child is better off with the
mother, the law also supports this ideology. A child below the age of 11 years is granted
to the mother, many fathers feel the anguish of separation from their child. A trend
common in Indian couples in the U.K. is that the mother leaves the father with her child
as a new method of extortion, getting her monetary demands fulfilled and holding their
child hostage away from the purview of the father.

Some organisations are doing commendable job to help the men caught in such cases.
One such organisation with 30,000 members globally work in cohesion with victims to
provide each individual an opportunity to prove their innocence in the court of law.
Although their perspective on marital rape in marriage is horrendous, the pro-bono legal
advice they provide to male victims of the Marriage Amendment Act (2000)is
commendable. The weekly meetings, where victims speak of their troubles, are testimony
to the mass effect one FIR has on an entire family. While filing a complaint women tend
to harness the power of non-bailable arrests thereby ensuring that the entire family goes
to jail. They are also witness to individuals who have lost all hope due to the public
shame and humility they and their families have had to go through resulting in suicide.
With their help many men have fought to urge to relinquish their lives and found a
support system, albeit with a lot of setbacks and anguish.

Many people might jeer and jest at this reversal of situations and say, “Men deserve this
treatment, after centuries of patriarchal dominance they are getting back what they give.”
If you look up close to the individuals who are falsely accused of a crime they haven’t
committed the situation is more serious than thought of, a man loses his job, his respect
and dignity are torn away, the entire family is ashamed due to public persecution by
officials, and then there are the lingering court cases that never seem to end and are near
impossible to win. It is a tight rope that the country is walking on where the crime against
women is high and the crime perpetrated by women is also on the rise, a balance has to
be reached to ensure that equality is not manhandled and reaches it’s true definition by
merging with humanism.

The circumstances that led to the enactment of PWDVA, 2005

The first limitation under Section 498A of IPC is the exclusion of women victims of
domestic violence not covered under matrimonial relationship.46

According to the 2005-2006 National Family Health Survey in India, thirty-seven percent
of married women reported experiencing some form of domestic violence on at least one
occasion during their marriage. What is even more disconcerting, however, is the fact that
these statistics do not include the vast majority of cases which are unreported. In addition,
a large proportion of Indian men and women justify this abuse. According to the survey,
fifty-one percent of seventy-five thousand men surveyed believed hitting their wives is
acceptable for various reasons including disrespect of their in-laws, refusing sex, and bad
cooking, while fifty-five percent of women believed that spousal abuse at times may be
warranted.1 These pervasive cultural perceptions, partially driven by India’s largely
patriarchal society, are one of the major obstacles to the successful implementation of the
PWDVA.

46 Available on http://www.womenstudies.in/elib/crime_ag_women/ca_the_law_and.pdf, visited on

25.7.2018.
Despite cultural justifications for spousal violence, some women still try to turn to the
justice system for assistance. However, prior to the passing of the PWDVA in 2005 and
its enforcement in October 2006, women could only seek criminal sanctions for domestic
violence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (the “Anti-Cruelty Act”) or
Section 304B (the “Dowry Death Act”), or face the social stigma of getting a divorce.2
These two pieces of legislation could be used only in very limited circumstances: 498A
only punishes husbands or relatives of husbands for acts of harassment or violence that
would likely drive a woman to commit suicide or cause grave danger to her life, limb or
health; 304B may only be used post-mortem to punish violence against a woman when
the cause of her death can be shown to be related to dowry demands.3 1 National Family
Health Survey 3 Key Findings Report, available at: http://www.nfhsindia.org/NFHS-3
NKF/Report.pdf. 2 Amy Hornbeck, Bethany Johnson, Michelle LaGrotta, Kellie
Sellman, The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act: Solution or Mere
Paper Tiger?, 4 Loy. U. Chi. Int'l L. Rev. 273, 277-78 (2007). 3 Id. Recognizing these
significant gaps in the law excluding numerous women victims, the National Commission
of Women approached the Lawyer’s Collective in 1993 to draft legislation to close these
loopholes. After years of work and with the combined efforts of the Lawyers Collective,
other women’s rights groups, and input from government officials, the PWDVA was
born.4 It was seen as a landmark step in improving the situation of women in India,
broadening existing definitions of domestic violence to include not only physical but
verbal, emotional, sexual, and economic abuse, and allowing women civil and/or criminal
recourse for violations of the Act.5

The Domestic Violence Act, 2005

the term ‘domestic violence’ has been used in widest sense which covers all forms of
physical , sexual, verbal, emotional and economic abuse that can harm, cause injury to,
endanger the health safety, life , limb or well-being either mental or physical of the
aggrieved person.
Basic Features of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005

1. Apart from the victim herself, the complaint regarding an act or act of domestic
violence can also be lodged by ‘any person who has a reason to believe that’ such an act
was committed or is being committed. This means that neighbors, social workers,
relatives can also take initiative. And the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act
make sure that ‘no criminal, civil or any other liability’ lies on the informer, if the
complaint is lodged in good faith.47

2. The magistrate has been given powers to permit the aggrieved women to stay in her
place of adobe and she can not be evicted by her male relatives in the retaliation.

This is not all; the aggrieved woman can even be allotted a part of the house for personal
use.

3. The respondent can be prohibited from dispossessing the aggrieved person or in any
other manner disturbing her possessions, entering the aggrieved person’s place of work, if
the aggrieved person is a child, the school. Also magistrate can bar the respondent to
communicate with aggrieved person by “personal, oral, written, electronic or
telephonic contact.”

4. The magistrate can impose monthly payments of maintenance. The respondent can also
be ordered to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and
any child of aggrieved person as a result of domestic violence. It can also cover loss of
earnings, medical expenses, loss or damage to property.

Under Sec 22 magistrate can make the respondent pay compensation and damages for
injuries including mental torture and emotional distress caused by act(s) of domestic
violence.

5. Penalty up to one-year and/or a fine up to Rs. 20,000/- can be imposed under the act.
The offence is also considered cognizable and non-bailable while Sec 32 (2) goes even
says that ‘under the sole testimony of the aggrieved person, the court may conclude
that an offence has been committed by the accused”.

47Available http://www.mightylaws.in
6. The act ensures speedy justice as the court has to start proceedings and have the first
hearing within 3 days of the complaint being filed in the court and every case must be
disposed off within a period of sixty days of the first hearing.

7. The act makes provisions for state to provide for protection officers and status
of ‘service providers’ and ‘medical facility’.

8. Chapter 4 Sec 16 allows the magistrate to hold proceedings in camera “if either
party to the proceedings so desires”.

Misuse of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971

Abortion, a subject often discussed in medico-legal circles, interims various streams of

thoughts and multiple discipline, like theology, because most religions have something to
say in the matter, ethics, because human conduct and its moral evaluation are the basic
issues involved; medicine (in several of its sub-disciplines), because, interference with
the body for a curative or supposedly curative issue is at focus; and law, because
regulation of human conduct by sanctions enforced by the state through the process of
law ultimately become the central theme for discussion.48 .

Abortion may be classified into various categories depending upon the nature and
circumstances under which it occurs. For instance, it may be either, (i) natural; (ii)
accidental; (iii) spontaneous; (iv) artificial or induced abortion. Abortions falling under
the first three categories are not punishable, while induced abortion is criminal unless
exempted under the law. Natural abortions is a very common phenomena and may occur
due to many reasons, such as bad health, defect in generative organs of the mother,
shocks, fear, joy, etc. Accidental abortion very often takes place because of pathological
reasons where pregnancy cannot be completed and the uterus empties before the maturity
of fetus. Induced abortions is denied in law as an untimely delivery voluntarily procured
with intent to destroy the foetus. It may be procured at any time before the natural birth of
the child.

48 http://www.legalservicesindia.com/articles/pregact.htm
The Child v. The Mother:
Abortion raises a variety of moral, legal, social and medical questions. If the pregnant
women finds it necessary to terminate her pregnancy, does she have the right and upto
what moment and on what conditions? Since such termination raises a conflict between
the rights of the child and the mother (the child's right to survival and the mother's right
to terminate the pregnancy), who is competent to adjudicate the claim? As a basic
premise law states, that killing a foetus is not permissible. If then qualifies, this
opposition by specifying a series of exceptions. These exceptions purpose to be based on
some specific consideration. One such consideration is concerned with the conflict
between the rights of the mother and the rights of the child. The mothers right is allowed
to prevail, in some situations. The women's supposed superiority in his matter is
jurisprudentially explained in terms of the "necessity" of the situation coupled with her
right to self-defense. To save the life or the health of the women, on a balance of
probabilities, the lesser evil is looked upon as the limitation of the foetus to that of the
mother.49

As per Section 81 of Indian Penal Code an act which would otherwise be a crime may in
some cases be excused if the person accused can show that it was done only in order to
avoid consequences which could not be otherwise be awarded and which if they had
allowed, would have inflicted upon him or upon others whom he was bound to protect
inevitable and irreparable evil, that no more was done than was reasonably necessary for
that purpose, and that the evil inflicted by it was not disproportionate to the evil avoided.
Reliance on the doctrine of self-defense is nothing new to the law. All legal systems
recognize the right of a living individual to protect himself from danger to his own life
and, for that purpose, to use necessary force even to the extend of causing the death of the
person creating the danger.

The law most undoubtedly authorizes the man who is under reasonable apprehension that
his life is in danger or his body in risk of grievous hurt to inflict death upon his assailant
even when the assault is attempted or directly threatened by the apprehension must be

49 ibid
reasonable and the violence inflicted must not be greater than is reasonably necessary for
the purpose of self defense. In this case the continuation of the existence of the foetus is
looked upon as dangerous to the life of the mother. The balancing of one life against
another life in such circumstances may be understood by some stretch of reasoning. The
difficulty arises on the issue of balancing of one person' health against another person's
life. Here arise certain ingrained complexities. Life and health do not get equated on a
common platform.

The fact that the women's health would be endangered if the pregnancy is carried to the
full term was not (until fairly, recently) recognized as a justification for abortion. That
step has not been taken but obviously it constitute a greater inroads in the sanctity of life
(of the foetus) than a provision intended to guard against danger to the women's life.
 CHAPTER 3

CONSTITUTION VALIDITY OF SECTION 498-A

Section 498A is seen that it contravene the Article 14 of the Constitution. But Delhi High
Court has given judgment on Inder raj malik & others v. Mrs sumita malik3 , that does
not contravenes the powers of article 14. It is separate from all the section. Section 4 of
Dowry prohibition Act 1961 is also different from the section 498A IPC. Where Section
498A talks about the cruelty given by husband and in-laws to the wife for the demanding
of dowry. In the leading case wazir chand v. state of Haryana4 , that the death caused by
burning of a newly married woman, the reason for that is not establish either murder or
an abetted suicide, but after the investigation. The facts says that the death cause for the
persistently demanding dowry by husband and her in-laws from the girl`s side, till her
last breath of life. With these circumstances, section 498A of IPC launched as a weapon
to the women against their husband & their in-laws. But now many of the girls were
misusing this section, they blackmailing the husband and fixing the case with lum sum
amount of compensation out of the court. By these the supreme court given an order and
make an amendment on section 498A that there will be no direct arrest of husband and
their family without proper investigation.50

Section 498A Indian Penal Code 1860, was state a misuse law by women to men for their
personal benefit. After educating girls, they studied and known that section 498A IPC is
cognizable and non-bailable and it works to safeguards women from their and their in-
laws. After complaining report under section 498A of IPC direct arrest was made by the
public servants without taking any proper or complete information regarding the incident
the husband and his parents were immediately caught and make them behind the bar.
Because of this many women`s were misusing this section for their benefits and its get
very bad impact to the society at large.

In the case Preeti Gupta & Anr vs State of Jharkhand & Anr5 on 13 August, 2010, the
facts says that the case was filed under section 498A of IPC false allegation and charged

50 http://www.managejournal.com/
was framed by wife to her husband and her in-laws and the witnesses during the incident
was fake and not truth. Likewise there are many cases in which wife charging the false
allegation to their husband and her in-laws, supreme court order that their will be no
direct arrest without proper investigation and make section 498A of IPC a bailable
offence. In the case Savitri devi v. Ramesh Chand ors.6 The court held that the provision
was not correct misuse and exploitation was happening, the section were using for such
basic reason that marriage was not so good and it is not healthy to the society. By these
lawmaker has understand and think to review the provision and make some amendment
on it.

Dowry practice was almost end in our society 6% people in Raipur District of
Chhattisgarh were accepting the dowry practice in our society and 93.33% people were
not accepted the dowry practice. It has very grateful to know this radical change in our
society. Dowry has become a curse to the women after marriage in the period of 18
century thereby Govt. make separate laws and section for protection of women from
dowry i.e. Sec 498A IPC 1860, this Section protect women from the practice of dowry
87% people believed and it really safeguards women. But the women were started
misusing Sec-498A IPC against their men, the people were accepted during survey in
Raipur district. Whole 90 people were stated that there is a misuse of sec 498A by wife to
their husband for alimony or maintenance with the total percentile of 100. This section
was really gives harassment to men in the society this is conferred by 95% people in
Raipur. And with the same percentile of 95% people also agree that there should be
punishment for misusing sec-498A IPC by making a stringent law. Because it was seen
that this section has bias against the men to safeguard them from dowry practice as
compared with women. 96% people were saying the Govt. should make an amendment in
the section498A IPC and give some privilege to men also. And 82% people want a strict
punishment for misused of Section 498A IPC by the women.51

There is a cases which are pending in a District Court Raipur Chhattisgarh, these cases
are filed by women under sec 498A IPC for allegation of dowry demand. The women
were living their matrimonial house and went to their parent’s home and charging a false

51 http://www.managejournal.com
allegation against their husband and in-laws. This cases has shown the misuse of section
498A and also that how this section were used as a weapon by wife against husband for
alimony and maintenance.

Abha sahu v. State of C.G., The fact says that the petitioner filed a case after seven years
of marriage. The charges framed 5 AIR 2010 SC 3363 6 II (2003) DMC 328 International
Journal of Commerce and Management Research, Toll Free: 1800-1234-070 35 IMS
Business School Presents Doctoral Colloquium – 2017 ISBN: 978-93-85895-57-9 by
petitioner were sec-498A and 34 of IPC, under this section petitioner filed a case. The
petitioner was living with her husband and her in-laws. The petitioner said that her
husband and her jethani were harassing her and giving mental torture for dowry. Then
she was told about all the instances to her parental home. Then their parents want to talk
and solve all the problems related to it. But the matrimonial house after discussing they
were not saying anything to her but as soon as days go on they again started torture her.
By thing all this instances the mother of petitioner was died. After 3 years, the parental
house was continuing harassing her and then she left their home and lives with their
parental home. At last the petitioner has no option other than to leave their house. The
petitioner also said that the husband has neglected from conjugal rights. He never
maintains a physical relation with her. The petitioner file a suit in a district court Raipur
under se-498A and 34 of IPC and also demand for divorce with the alimony of monthly
compensation. The case was pending for the evidence in a district court Raipur.52

Smt. Dhaneshwari Agrawal v. State of C.G., The facts says that the petitioner were done
a inter cast love marriage with another caste guy. The marriage was done in a Raipur
without the permission of their parents. After sometime they both are living in a bilaspur
city of Chhattisgarh with a happily married life. After 1 year the parents of husband were
accepted the marriage and told his son to come back and they will again re marry of their
son with his wife with proper rights and rituals. The husband accepted the offer and came
back, but the parents of wife doesn`t want to marry with the other caste guy, so they are
not accepting the marriage. Likewise, the husband also started to give a mental torture to
their wife and demanding her dowry. The girl after so much hindrance taken decision that

52 ibid
they want to leave their matrimonial house. And then she left the home and started living
with their parents. Then she files a suit under jurisdiction of Raipur c.g. under sec-498A
and 34 of IPC. The case was pending for the evidence in a district court Raipur.

Smt. Nitu Dubey v. State of C.G., the facts say that the petitioner was living with her
husband after marriage in a rajnandgaon C.G. The Petitioner filed a suit on the district
court rajnandgaon under sec-498A, 506,323 of IPC. That after one year of marriage the
husband and his family were started torture her for dowry and also they demand a hero
Honda bike with their parents. The petitioner after 8 years of marriage framed charges for
divorce and permanent compensation from their husband. The petitioner also said that her
husband and his elder brother were forcing her and gives her a mental and physical
cruelty and they demanding dowry. The petioner has 2 children one girl i.e. 8 years old
and one boy. They want a compensation and live separate from her husband. The case is
pending for evidence in the jurisdiction of rajnandgaon district court.

Misuse of section 498A IPC there is a large number of cases seen by Supreme Court in
India. My research is based on misuse of Sec-498A IPC is completed with the survey and
research on cases of district court Raipur (C.G.). I have authenticated 100 forms during
survey in which 10 are rejected and 90 forms were accepted. With this survey report it
was seen that there is exploitation against men and women were taking privilege. There
was misuse of sec-498A IPC by women, this was accepted by whole 100% people and
95% people were believed that there should be strict punishment for misusing sec-498A
IPC by making a strict law. Out of these 52% people were saying sec-498A is contravene
the article 14 right to equality of constitution but 47% people have disagree against this
contravene. This section has become a crucial problem to men in society. Misuse of
section 498A IPC against men has become realty. All the people were accepting the
misused and partiality of this section because men does not having any law or point to
safeguard himself from the false charge of misused. This has made a very major issue for
marriage. It lays fear in husband heart before marrying any girl. Misuse of sec- 498A
should be stopped and make some privilege to men also under this Section.
Section 498-An of IPC states, that whoever being the husband or relative of the spouse of
lady, subjects such lady to brutality will be rebuffed with the detainment for a term which
may reach out to three years and furthermore be ready to fine.53

Normal for 498A

• Cognizable – The denounced can be captured and imprisoned without warrant or

examination.
• Non-Compoundable – The grievance can't be with-drawn by the applicant.
• Non-Bailable – The denounced must show up in the court to ask for safeguard.

Meaning of Cruelty:

It was held in Kaliyaperumal v. State of Tamil Nadu,54 that mercilessness is a typical

fundamental in offenses under both the Sections 304B and 498A of IPC. The two areas
are not commonly comprehensive but rather both are particular offenses and people
absolved under Section 304B for the offense of endowment passing can be indicted for an
offense under Section 498A of IPC. Area 304B does not contain its mean-ing but rather
the significance of remorselessness or badgering as given in Section 498A applies in
Section 304B also. Under Section 498A of IPC brutality without anyone else sums to an
offense though under Section 304B the offense is of endowment demise and the passing
more likely than not happened over the span of seven long stretches of marriage. In any
case, no such period is specified in Section 498A.

Constitutional Validity of Section 498A:

In Inder Raj Malik and others v. Mrs. Sumita Malik55, it was fought that this area is ultra
vires Article 14 and Article 20 (2) of the Constitution. There is the Dowry Prohibition
Act which additionally manages comparable kinds of cases; along these lines, the two
statutes together make a circumstance com-monly known as twofold danger. In any case,

53 available at https://www.worldwidejournals.com
54 2003 Cri L.J.4321 (SC)
55 1986Cri L.J 1510(Del.)
Delhi High Court negatives this conflict and held that this area does not make
circumstance for twofold peril. Section 498A is recognizable from Section 4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act in light of the fact that in the last unimportant request of
settlement is play on words ishable and presence of component of pitilessness isn't
important, though Section 498A manages irritated type of the offense. It rebuffs such
requests of property or valu-capable security from the spouse or her relatives as are
combined with mercilessness to her. Henceforth a man can be arraigned in regard of both
the offenses culpable under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and this Section.

This Section gives wide prudence to the courts in the tangle ters of understanding of the
words happening in the laws and furthermore in issues of granting discipline. This provi-
sion isn't ultra infection. It doesn't give self-assertive powers on courts.

In Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana,56 demise of the de-stopped was caused by

consume wounds. There was prove that the perished was tormented for endowment
request In perspective of dominance of confirmation of torment and share de-mand an
assumption under Section 113A of the Evidence Act emerges. Consequently the
conviction of the spouse and his folks under Section 306 and 498A, Penal Code was
legitimate.

Sorts of remorselessness secured under this area incorporates take after ing -

Cruelty by vexatious case

Cruelty by hardship and inefficient propensities

Cruelty by steady request

Cruelty by additional conjugal relations

Harassment for non-endowment request

Cruelty by renunciation of infant young lady

56 2001Cri.L.J.1679 (S.C.)
 Cruelty by false assaults on celibacy

Taking ceaselessly youngsters

Research Paper

In Giiridhar Shankar Tawade v. Province of Maharastra,57 itwas held that some cogent
evidence is required to bring the charge under Section 498A.There was no such evidence
available on record. Therefore the accused would be required to be acquitted of the
charge under Section 498A of IPC Supreme Court in Mohd. Hoshan v. State of A.P.,58
case observed as: “Whether one spouse has been guilt of cruelty to the other is essentially
a question of fact. The impact of complaints, accusation or taunts on a person amount-ing
to cruelty depends on various factors like the sensi-tivity of the victim concerned, the
social background, the environment, education etc. Further, mental cruelty varies from
person to person depending on the intensity of the sensitivity, degree of courage and
endurance to withstand such cruelty. Each case has to be decided on its own facts
whether mental cruelty is made out”.

In Ruchi Agarwal v. Amit Kumar Agrawal and others,59 Supreme Court has quashed the
criminal complaint al-leged offences under Section 498A, 323 and 506 IPC, and Section
3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. It
would be an abuse of process of court if a criminal proceeding from which this appeal
arises is allowed to continue.

In Sushil Kumar v. State of Haryana,60 Supreme Court held that in absence of any
evidence to show that victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment soon before death,
no offence under Section 304B is made out. Absolutely no evidence of coercion,
conviction under Section 498A be-comes unwarranted. Convictions and sentences of
appel-lant set aside.

57 2002 Cri.L.J.814(S.C.)
58 CriLJ 4124 2002
59 Appeal (Crl.) 1274 of 2004, Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3769 of 2003
60 Criminal Writ Petition No. 361 of 2010
The State of Andhra Pradesh v. Raj Gopal Asawa and another,61 the Supreme Court held
that Sections 304 B and 498 A of IPC, Section 113 B conjoint reading shows that there
must be material to show that soon before her death the victim was subjected to cruelty or
harassment.

In Hans Raj v. State of Haryana,62 it was held by the Su-preme Court that having
regarded to the fact of the case, though the prosecution failed to establish the offence un-
der Section 306 IPC, the evidence on record justified the conviction of the accused under
Section 498A of IPC.

Nallam Veera Stayanandam and others v. High Court of Andhra Pradesh, 63

Presumption under Section 113B of the Evidence Act is available to the prosecution; first
dy-ing declaration is accepted Secondly presumption stands rebutted. Unless the
prosecution is able to establish that the cause of death was not accidental by evidence
other than the dying declarations, the prosecution case under Section 304B IPC as against
the appellants must fail. On facts of the evidence Supreme Court held that conviction of
accused under Section 498A, IPC is justified.

In Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab,64 the Supreme Court held that in view of the fact that
victim was rescued by neighbor. Case of suicide must be ruled out and the con-viction of
the accused under Section 302 IPC was held proper. However, in view of inconsistencies
between two dying declarations benefit of doubt must be given to mother –in-law as for
the offence under Section 302 IPC. is concerned. However conviction of both the accused
un-der Section 498A was held proper. It was also made clear that only because dying
declaration was not recorded by a magistrate it by itself may not be a ground to disbelieve
entire prosecution case.

61 RD –SC-172 (17 March, 2004)

62 2004Cri.L.J1759(SC)
63 1996(2) ALT Cri. 191
64 2006 Cri.L.J.4646(S.C.)
In Surender v. State of Haryana,65 the Supreme Court held that it is not necessary that
express words should be used in order to instigate. The offence of abetment de-pends
upon the intention of the person who abets and not upon the act which is done by the
person who is abetted

.A young pregnant woman having a child in womb would not ordinarily commit suicide
unless she was compelled to do so. Hence conviction of accused was held to be proper
under Section 306/34 and also Section 498A/34 as there was enough evidence of
harassment for demand of dowry.

Justice Malimath Committee on Reforms of Criminal Jus-tice System, Government of

India, Ministry of Home Af-fairs, 2003 observed the following and gave the recom-
mendation to amend the law immediately:

The Code may be suitably amended to make the offence under Section 498 A of the I.PC
Code, bailable and com-poundable.These are only a few observations of their lord-ships
from scores which conclusively prove that:

A woman (not necessarily every woman) can be much more cruel than a man (not
necessarily every man).

While intending to protect the life of a person, Section 498A of IPC jeopardizes around a
dozen innocent persons. Hence, the provision is discriminatory and in violation to the
Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Instead of restoring equilibrium, the provision aggravates disequilibria. Hence, there is a

failure of guarantee of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.66

For the reasons stated under conclusions 2 and 3 above the provision is not only
imbalanced but also ultra virus.

65 2007 Cri.L.J.4124(SC)
66 KD GOUR,The Indian Penal Code,2012edition.
The Malimath Committee in 2003 proposed influencing corrections to this Section albeit
such changes to have been contradicted by Women' gatherings and radical femi-nists.
The Center for Social Research India has discharged an examination report contradicting
alterations to Section 498A. As indicated by this report, in the considered cases there
were no feelings construct exclusively with respect to Section 498A.

On 20 July 2005, Justices Arijit Pasayat and H.K. Seema of the Indian Supreme Court
pronounced Section 498A to be Constitutional. The protest is to strike at the base of
endowment threat. However, by abuse of the arrangement another legitimate ter-rorism
can be released. The arrangement is planned to be utilized as a shield and not a
professional killer's weapon. On the off chance that [the] cry of "wolf" is made time and
again as a trick, help and expert tection may not be accessible when the real wolf shows
up, the Bench said.

The non compoundability of the Act is a principled po-sition it takes and imperative to
the soul in which it was established i.e. brutality isn't debatable and unaccepta-ble under
any conditions. Any revision to Sec-tion 498A no doubt will revoke the established order
of Articles 14and 15 (3); it will be a disappointment of the State to accomplish its
proposed objective of sexual orientation correspondence. The courts have additionally
maintained the legitimacy of the uncommon meas-ures in enactment and official requests
favoring Women (e.g. in Laxman Ram Mane Vs. Province of Maharashtra67, Nripen Roy
and others v State of West Bengal68; Satya Narayan Tiwari @ Jolly & Anr. Vs. State Of
U.P; Inder Raj Malik And Ors vs Sunita Malik; Gurbachan Singh vs Satpal Singh &
Ors). It may be added that through the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) Amendment
Bill 2010, there are restrictions now on the police as far as arrests are concerned; the
arrest can be done only after proper inves-tigation in the reported matter.

67 2010 Indlaw SC 217

68 2010 Indlaw CAL 763
Misuse of section 498A IPC

Section 498A Indian Penal Code 1860, was express an abuse law by Women to men for
their own advantage. Subsequent to instructing young Women, they contemplated and
realized that Section 498A IPC is cognizable and non-bailable and it attempts to shields
Women from their and their in-laws. In the wake of whining report under Section 498A
of IPC coordinate capture was made by general society hirelings without taking any
appropriate or finish data in regards to the occurrence the spouse and his folks were
instantly gotten and make them behind the bar. In view of this numerous women`s were
abusing this Section for their advantages and its get awful effect to the general public on
the loose.

For the situation Preeti Gupta and Anr versus State of Jharkhand and Anr5 on 13 August,
2010, the actualities says that the case was documented under area 498A of IPC false
affirmation and charged was surrounded by spouse to her better half and her in-laws and
the observers amid the episode was phony and not truth. In like manner there are
numerous cases in which spouse charging the false claim to their better half and her in-
laws, incomparable court arrange that their will be no immediate capture without
appropriate examination and make area 498A of IPC a bailable offense. For the situation
Savitri devi v. Ramesh Chand ors.6 The court held that the arrangement was not right
abuse and misuse was going on, the Section were utilizing for such essential reason that
marriage was not all that great and it isn't beneficial to the general public. By these
administrator has comprehend and think to audit the arrangement and make some change
on it.
 CHAPTER 4

CASE STUDY

1. Saritha Vs Ramachandra Judgment'

This is an old judgment from 2003. This quash (Section 482) petition belongs to one of
the oldest members of the movement to end the abuse of 498A. This judgment also has
the FIR reproduced in full. The FIR looks a lot like the FIR filed by my ex-wife against
myself and my family. It looks like a formula is being applied for filing FIRs, but again,
that is just my opinion. An appeal to the Supreme Court challenging the quash, also led to
the same verdict. This ended the Katti 498A case, a great victory for SIF.69

Here is the judgment: Karnataka HC Quashes Pandurang Katti 498A-2003

Here are some observations from this judgment:

 “As regards to the alleged beating of the respondent number 2 by the petitioner no 2 it is
submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that it is absurd even to think that an
old lady of 65 years would beat an independent minded educated young lady who also
happens to be a state cricket player. I refrain from expressing any opinion regarding the
truthfulness or otherwise of the matter but find that even if such a beating as alleged had
been done for one day that can be termed only as a quarrel between mother in law and
daughter in law and by no stretch of imagination it can be brought under the purview of
an offense under section 498a of the IPC.”

 With respects to this the perceptions made by the Andhra Pradesh High Court on account
of Saritha V R.Ramachandra announced in (I) (2003) DMC 37 (DB) might be alluded to:
“The court would like to go on record that for nothing the educated women are
approaching the courts for divorce and resorting to proceedings against in-laws under
section 498A, IPC implicating not only the husbands but also their family members
whether in India or Abroad. This is nothing but misuse of the beneficial provision
intended to save the women from unscrupulous husbands. It has taken a reverse trend

69 2002 (6) ALD 319, 2002 (4) ALT 592, I (2003) DMC 37
now. In some cases this kind of actions is coming as a formidable hurdle in the
reconciliation efforts made by either well meaning people or the court and the sanctity
attached to the marriage in Hindu Religion and the statutory mandate that the courts try to
save the marriage through conciliatory efforts till last, are being buried neck-deep. It is
for the law commission and the parliament either to continue that provision (section 498a
IPC) in the same form or to make that offense non cognizable and bailable so that ill-
educated women of this country do not misuse the provision to harass innocent people for
the sin of contracting marriage with egoistic women “

2. Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar70

Preeminent Court on second July ,2014 in Arnesh kumar versus State of

Bihar(CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1277 OF 2014) gave following judgment with respect
to capture in cases having discipline upto 7 years .

So as to guarantee that cops don't capture blamed pointlessly and Magistrate don't
approve detainment calmly and mechanically. To guarantee court gave the accompanying
headings:
(1) All the State Governments to teach its cops not to naturally capture when a case under
Section 498-An of the IPC is enrolled yet to fulfill themselves about the need for capture
under the parameters set down above spilling out of Section 41, Cr.PC;
(2) All cops be furnished with a check list containing determined sub-provisos under
Section 41(1)(b)(ii);
(3) The cop will forward the check list properly recorded and outfit the reasons and
materials which required the capture, while sending/delivering the charged before the
Magistrate for facilitate confinement;

70 2014 (VII) AD 697 (SC), 2014 (3) BomCR 362 (Cri), 2014 (III) CCR 144 (SC), 2014 (210) DLT 599
(SC), 2014 (II) DMC 546 SC, 2014 (2) GLH 547, 2014 (2) GLR 1848, ILR 2014 (3) Ker 165, 2014 (3)
JCC 1529, JT 2014 (7) SC 527, 2014 (4) KarLJ 177 (SC), 2014 (3) KHC 69, 2014 (3) KLJ 330, 2014 (3)
KLT 143 (SC), 2014 (4) MPHT 81 (SC), 2014 (3) PLJR 314, 2014
(4) The Magistrate while approving confinement of the charged will scrutinize the report
outfitted by the cop in wording previously mentioned and simply subsequent to recording
its fulfillment, the Magistrate will approve detainment;
(5) The choice not to capture a blamed, be sent to the Magistrate inside two weeks from
the date of the establishment ofthe case with a duplicate to the Magistrate which might be
reached out by the Superintendent of police of the locale for the motivations to be
recorded in composing;
(6) Notice of appearance as far as Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the denounced
inside two weeks from the date of establishment of the case, which might be reached out
by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the motivations to be recorded in
composing;
(7) Failure to conform to the headings aforementioned will separated from rendering the
cops concerned subject for departmental activity, they will likewise be at risk to be
rebuffed for hatred of court to be organized under the watchful eye of High Court having
regional locale.
(8) Authorizing detainment without recording reasons as previously mentioned by the
judicialMagistrate concerned will be at risk for departmental activity by the suitable High
Court.
The court included that the bearings previously mentioned will not just apply to the cases
under Section 498-An of the I.P.C. or on the other hand Section 4 of the Dowry
Prohibition Act, the case close by, yet additionally such situations where offense is
culpable with detainment for a term which might be under seven years or which may
stretch out to seven years; regardless of whether with or without fine.

3. Savitri Devi vs Ramesh Chand And Ors. on 19 May, 200371

Despite the fact that State has the locus standi to incline toward such petitions, since
applicant is the spouse and on her protest case was enrolled and charge sheet was
documented, and has grievance against the request dated 13.3.2002 gone by Ms. Nisha
Saxena, Metropolitan Magistrate this is being engaged.

71 2003 CriLJ 2759, 104 (2003) DLT 824, II (2003) DMC 328, 2003 (69) DRJ 6
Vide denounced arrange charge for the offense culpable under Section 406, IPC for
misappropriation of endowment articles and istridhan was encircled against her better
half just and her dad in-law, brothers by marriage and sister-in-law (spouse of one of the
siblings of her significant other) and her unmarried sister-in-law were released and charge
for the offense under Section 498A IPC i.e. provocation of the spouse by the husband and
his relatives for lacking endowment or non-satisfaction of requests of settlement was
surrounded against the husband and father-in-law alone. As per the applicant/spouse,
each individual from the family however the senior sibling of the husband kicked the
bucket amid the procedures ought to have been subjected to preliminary for both the
offenses viz offense under Section 498A, IPC and additionally 406 IPC.

The claims in a word are that after marriage her in-laws exceptionally her dad in-law and
her significant other and the brother by marriage disliked the share articles and
communicated their misery that they were not given Hero Honda and money of Rs.
50,000/ - . The spouse of senior sibling of her better half Ms. Mukesh and the sister of her
significant other disliked the garments given for them and Ms. Mukesh spoke to that if
Sanjay had hitched her more youthful sister then he would have more endowment. The
principle claims of provocation were against the spouse and father-in-law. There were no
claims of interest of settlement against different relatives.

To begin with, conjugal offenses under Sections 498A/406 IPC be made bailable , if no
grave physical damage is exacted and fundamentally compoundable. On the off chance
that the gatherings choose to either settle their question genially to rescue the marriage or
choose to put a conclusion to their marriage by shared separation, they ought to be
permitted to intensify the offenses with the goal that criminal procedures don't pursue
them on the off chance that they need to begin their conjugal life once more or something
else. The past ought not frequent them nor the ax they have covered ought to be permitted
to be uncovered and damage their present life or future wedded life.

In conclusion in perspective of affectability of such offenses and with a specific end goal
to maintain a strategic distance from awkwardness in human relations and survey this
issue from human and social perspective, and the law the way things are today it is
necessitated that the examination concerning these offenses be vested in common experts
like Executive Magistrates and after his finding with regards to the commission of the
offense, insight ought to be taken. Till such a system is developed, no cop underneath the
rank of ACP for the offenses under Section 498A/406 IPC and D.C.P for the offense
under Section 304-B IPC i.e endowment passing ought to be vested with examination and
where minor school going kids are named, they will not be validated and be sent to the
court for taking comprehension and further procedures. Their capture destroy their future
life and lower them in their confidence. This court has even managed the safeguard
applications and arraignment of youngsters just for the way that their names likewise
figured in the dissension held up by the spouse. In specific cases even fabulous guardians
of the spouse who are in their eighties and nineties endure this awful circumstance.

There is growing inclination to turn out with expanded and misrepresented claims
restricting in every single connection of the spouse and in the event that one of them
happens to be of higher status or of defenseless standing, he or she turns into a simple
prey for better dealing and coercing.

These ground substances have pursuaded this court to prescribe to the specialists and
administrators to have a survey of the circumstance and legitimate arrangement.

Duplicate of the request be sent to Law Secretary, Union of India.

4. RAJNI-RINKI v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS

Mr. Lokesh Sharma, for the applicant.

Mr. N.S. Dhakar, Public Prosecutor for State.

By this normal request, three criminal misc.

applications for retraction of safeguard bearing No.97/2015, 98/2015 and 99/2015 will be
chosen together.

All the three applications have been documented by the distressed spouse of Vinod
Verma. Mewa Devi respondent No.2 to S.B. Cr. Misc. Application for Cancellation of
Bail No.97/2015, Raghuveer Verma respondent No.2 to S.B. Cr. Misc. Application for
Cancellation of Bail No.98/2015 and Sharada Devi and Kiran respondents No.2 and 3 to
S.B. Cr. Misc.

Application for Cancellation of Bail No.99/2015 are relations of spouse of the candidate,
wronged wife. The preliminary court had conceded pre-capture safeguard to mother by
marriage, senior sibling of the spouse, wife of senior sibling of the husband and another
connection of the husband.

It has been held by the Honble Apex Court in Preeti Gupta and Anr. v. Province of
Jharkhand[(2010) 7 SCC 667] that there is a propensity to swell the quantity of blamed in
marital question. The request gone by the court beneath giving safeguard to the charged
respondents experience the ill effects of no ailment and moreover, in the present appeal to
no affirmation has been leveled that the denounced respondents to the three applications
have abused the concession of safeguard.

Consequently, no ground is made out to cause impedance and all the three applications
are expelled being without justify.

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J.

Govind/ - All revisions made in the judgment/arrange have been fused in the
judgment/arrange being messaged.

Govind Sharma, Sr.PA

S.R.Batra v. Taruna Batra72

Ms. Taruna Batra wedded Amit Batra on April 14, 2000, who is the child of the two
appellants Mr. what's more, Mrs. S.R. Batra. After the marriage, Taruna and her
significant other began living together as a couple on the second floor of B-135, Ashok
Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi, while S.R. Batra and his better half lived independently on the
ground floor of a similar property. The whole property was only possessed by Taruna
Batra's relative, Mrs. S.R. Batra.

72 3 (2007) 3 SCC 169

Amit Batra petitioned for separate, after which Taruna Batra held up a FIR against her
better half, father-in-law, relative, and sister-in-law. They were altogether captured and
conceded safeguard following three days. Because of the rising strains, Taruna Batra
moved to her parent's habitation. Amit Batra, as well, moved out of the home and into his
own particular level in Ghaziabad. Later on, Taruna Batra attempted to come back to her
old home at B-135, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi, yet discovered it bolted. She
documented a suit looking for compulsory directive to empower her to go into the house
at the same time, before any request could be passed, she persuasively broke into the
living arrangement.

In forward and backward interests, a focal inquiry emerged: Should the second floor of
this property be viewed as Taruna Batra's marital home? The issue achieved the Supreme
Court, and turned into a point of interest judgment clearing up the lawful meaning of
"shared family unit." The Supreme Court discovered that all together for a home to be
viewed as a "mutual family", the spouse should either claim the property, he should pay
lease on the property, or the house must have a place with a joint group of which the
husband is a part. The court in this way decided the property being referred to does not
consider a "common family unit."

Bharatha Matha & Anr vs R. Vijaya Renganathan & Ors73

This interest has been favored against the Judgment and Order of the High Court of
Judicature at Madras dated tenth July, 2001 permitting the interest recorded by the
respondent No.1 against the judgment and declaration of the Ist Appellate Court dated
17.9.1986 confirming the judgment and pronouncement of the Trial Court dated 7.3.1977
in O.S. No.269/1975 initiated by the ancestor in-enthusiasm of the present appellants for

73 AIR 2010 SC 2685

asserting the property in debate and denying the offer to the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 or
their antecedent in-intrigue.

The actualities and conditions offering ascend to the present case are that the forerunner
in-enthusiasm of the present appellants, Peria Mariammal initiated a suit, being O.S. No.
269 of 1975 against the respondents and their forerunner in-enthusiasm guaranteeing the
offer of her sibling Muthu Reddiar, on the ground that he passed on unmarried and
intestate and that Smt. Rengammal, the respondent No. 1 in the suit was a lawfully
married spouse of one Alagarsami Reddiar, who was as yet alive, along these lines, her
case that she had live-in-association with offended party's sibling Muthu Reddiar and had
two youngsters from him, must be disregarded. The litigants/respondents challenged the
suit denying the marriage between respondent No. 1 and the said Alagarsami Reddiar.
The Trial Court declared the suit vide Judgment and declaration dated seventh March,
1977 account the finding that Rengammal, respondent No.1 in the suit was spouse of
Alagarsami Reddiar who was alive at the time of recording the suit. There had been
no lawful division between them. Thusly, the subject of live-in-relationship of Smt.
Rengammal with Muthu Reddiar couldn't emerge.

As Section 16 of the Act is concerned, however it was instituted to legitimize kids, who
might some way or another endure by getting to be ill-conceived, in the meantime it
explicitly give in Sub-Section (3) by engrafting an arrangement with a non-obstante
statement stipulating particularly that nothing contained in Sub-Section (1) or Sub-
Section (2) will be translated as giving upon any offspring of a marriage, which is invalid
and void or which is repealed by a pronouncement of nullity under Section 12, `any rights
in or to the property of any individual, other than the guardians, regardless where, yet for
the death of this Act, such kid would have been unequipped for having or securing any
such rights by reason of this not being the authentic offspring of his folks'. In the light of
such an express command of the governing body itself there is no space for concurring
upon such kids who however for Section 16 would have been marked as ill-conceived
any further rights than imagined in that by falling back on any hypothetical or inferential
procedure of thinking, having plan of action to the simple question or reason for ordering
Section 16of the Act. Any endeavor to do as such would add up to doing not just
savagery to the arrangement particularly engrafted in Sub-area (3) of Section 16 of the
Act yet in addition would endeavor to court relegislating regarding the matter under the
pretense of understanding, against even the will communicated in the order itself. Thusly,
we can't face the entries in the interest of the appellants"

This view has been endorsed and taken after by this Court in Neelamma and others Vs.
Sarojamma and others (2006) 9 SCC 612.

Along these lines, it is apparent that in such a reality circumstance, a youngster conceived
of void or voidable marriage isn't qualified for assert legacy in familial coparcenery
property however is qualified just for guarantee share in self procured properties,
assuming any.

In the moment case, respondents had not argued at any phase that the Suit arrive was a
self procured property of Muthu Reddiar. It is apparent from the record that Muthu
Reddiar did not Section his joint family properties and passed on issueless and intestate in
1974. In this way, the topic of legacy of coparcenery property by the ill-conceived
youngsters, who were resulting from the live-in-relationship, couldn't emerge. In this
way, the judgment of the High Court is at risk to be put aside just on this sole ground.

In perspective of the over, the interest succeeds and is permitted. The judgment and
request of the High Court dated tenth July, 2001 is thusly put aside. No request as to cost.

In any case, it will be available to R.5 to depend on lawful procedures, passable in law for
recuperation of the deal thought from his sellers as he has bought the property in lis
pendis and he appellants are still possessing the suit property.
Santanu Kumar Panda vs Unknown on 3 January, 2014

The short certainties of the case, as point by point in the application, is that the
complainant-inverse gathering no.2 wedded candidate no.1 on 07.06.1991, which was an
affection cum-orchestrated marriage. The contrary party no.2 brought forth a male kid,
Jyoti Ranjan Panda, on 02.02.1993 and from November, 1995, she lived with her better
half (solicitor no.1) in New Delhi, who was filling in as a Music Teacher in Father
Angels School, New Delhi. The contrary party no.2 was filling in as an educator at her
local place and as she was experiencing Tuberculosis, she surrendered from her
administration deliberately with impact from 30.11.1997. After the burial service
function of fabulous mother by marriage of inverse gathering no.2 in the year 1999, she
would not like to go to her in-laws local house and she separated all association with the
relatives of solicitor no.1.

The unavoidable conclusion is that, regardless of whether the assertions made by the
complainant in the challenge request of and the announcement of the witnesses recorded
under Section 202 (2) Cr.P.C. are taken at their face esteem and acknowledged
completely, no offense is made out against the solicitor nos. 3 to 6 under Sections 498-
A/506/34 IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act. Thus, the duration of the criminal
continuing against the said candidate nos.3 to 6 would be a mishandle of the procedure of
court.

For the reasons as aforestated, the reviled request of discernment dated 16.07.2011, gone
by the educated S.D.J.M., Balasore, in C.T. Case No.1725 of 2008, taking perception of
offenses underSection 498-A/506/34 IPC and Section 4 of the D.P. Act against the
solicitor nos.3 to 6 is thus subdued.

The application in respect of the petitioner no.1 (husband) is dismissed as not pressed.
Sushil Kumar Sharma Vs. Union of India (UOI)

“The object of the provision is prevention of the dowry meance. But as has been rightly
contended by the petitioner many instances have come to light where the complaints are
not bonafide and have filed with obligue motive. In such cases acquittal of the accused
does not in all cases wipe out the ignomy suffered during and prior to trial. Sometimes
adverse media coverage adds to the misery. The question, therefore, is what remedial
measures can be taken to prevent abuse of the well-intentioned provision. Merely because
the provision is constitutional and intra vires, does not give a licence to unscrupulous
persons to wreck personal vendetta or unleash harassment. It may, therefore, become
necessary for the legislature to find out ways how the makers of frivolous complaints or
allegations can be appropriately dealt with. Till then the Courts have to take care of the
situation within the existing frame work. As noted the object is to strike at the roots of
dowry menace. But by misuse of the provision a new legal terrorism can be unleashed.
The provision is intended to be used a shield and not assassins’ weapon. If cry of “wolf”
is made too often as a prank assistance and protection may not be available when the
actual “wolf” appears. There is no question of investigating agency and Courts casually
dealing with the allegations. They cannot follow any strait jacket formula in the matters
relating to dowry tortures, deaths and cruelty. It cannot be lost sight of that ultimate
objective of every legal system is to arrive at truth, punish the guilty and protect the
innocent.74 There is no scope for any pre-conceived notion or view. It is strenuously
argued by the petitioner that the investigating agencies and the courts start with the
presumption that the accused persons are guilty and that the complainant is speaking the
truth. This is too wide available and generalized statement. Certain statutory presumption
are drawn which again are reputable. It is to be noted that the role of the investigating
agencies and the courts is that of watch dog and not of a bloodhound. It should be their
effort to see that in innocent person is not made to suffer on account of unfounded,
baseless and malicious allegations. It is equally indisputable that in many cases no direct
evidence is available and the courts have to act on circumstantial evidence. While dealing

74 Case No: Writ Petition (C) No. 141 of 2005

with such cases, the law laid down relating to circumstantial evidence has to be kept in
view.”
Som Mittal Vs Govt. of Karnataka:
33. Experience has shown that the absence of the provision for anticipatory bail has been
causing great injustice and hardship to the citizens of U.P. For instance, often false FIRs
are filed e.g. under Section 498A IPC, Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act etc. Often aged
grandmothers, uncles, aunts, unmarried sisters etc. are implicated in such cases, even
though they may have nothing to do with the offence. Sometimes unmarried girls have to
go to jail, and this may affect their chances of marriage. As already observed by me
above, this is in violation of the decision of this Court in Joginder Kumars case (supra),
and the difficulty can be overcome by restoring the provision for anticipatory bail.75

Kans Raj vs. State of Punjab and others

The Honorable Judge has observed that:
“Crl.A.No.339-41/2005 Page 21 of 27 “In cases where such accusations are made, the
overt acts attributed to persons other than husband are required to be proved beyond
reasonable doubt. By mere conjectures and implications such relations cannot be held
guilty for the offence relating to dowry deaths.76 A tendency has, however, developed
for roping in all relations of the in-laws of the deceased wives in thematters of dowry
deaths which, if not discouraged, is likely to affect the case of the prosecution even
against the real culprits. In their over enthusiasm and anxiety to seek conviction for
maximum people, the parents of the deceased have been found to be making efforts for
involving other relations which ultimately weaken the case of the prosecution even
against the real accused as appears to have happened in the instant case.””

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

The Honorable Judge has observed that:77
“There is growing tendency these days to take revenge from the husband, by implicating
all his family members, by making allegations of general nature against all of them,

75 Appeal (crl.) 206 of 2008, DATE OF JUDGMENT: 29/01/2008

76 AIR 2000 SC 2324
77 Crl.A.No.339-41/2005
though the husband alone may be responsible for the cruelty inflicted to the woman. The
Courts, therefore, need to carefullyanalyze the evidence and need to separate the chaff
from the grain, so as to arrive at a just and fair conclusion.”

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT New Delhi, Reserved on: 12.02.2007

Date of Decision: February 23, 2007, by JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA
“Now-a-days, exorbitant claims are made about the amount spent on marriage and other
ceremonies and on dowry and gifts. In some cases claim is made of spending crores of
rupees on dowry without disclosing the source of income and how funds flowed. I
consider time has come that courts should insist upon disclosing source of such funds and
verification of income from tax returns and police should insist upon the compliance of
the Rules under Dowry Prohibition Act and should not entertain any complaint, if the
rules have not been complied with.78
The Metropolitan Magistrates should take cognizance of the offence under the Act in
respect of the offence of giving dowry whenever allegations are made that dowry was
given as a consideration of marriage, after demand. Courts should also insist upon
compliance with the rules framed under the Act and if rules are not complied with, an
adverse inference should be drawn. If huge cash amounts are alleged to be given at the
time of marriage which are not accounted anywhere, such cash transactions should be
brought to the notice of the Income Tax Department by the Court so that source of
income is verified and the person is brought to law. It is only because the Courts are not
insisting upon compliance with the relevant provisions of law while entertaining such
complaints and action is taken merely on the statement of the complainant, without any
verification that a large number of false complaints are pouring in.
I consider that the kinds of vague allegations as made in the complaint by the petitioner
against every member of the family of husband cannot be accepted by any court at their
face value and the allegations have to be scrutinized carefully by the Court before
framing charge.”

78 CRL.M.C.7262/2006
2002 (4) ALT 592 (D.B), In the High Court of judicature, Andhra Pradesh at
hyderabad
B. S. A Swamy and Dr. G. Yethirajulu, JJ, A. A. O. No. 1039 of 2001-Decided on 9-
7-2002
Saritha Vs R.Ramachandra reported in (I) (2003) DMC 37 ( DB )
“The court would like to go on record that for nothing the educated women are
approaching the courts for divorce and resorting to proceedings against in-laws under
section 498a , IPC implicating not only the husbands but also their family members
whether in India or Abroad. This is nothing but misuse e of the beneficial provision
intended to save the women from unscrupulous husbands. It has taken a reverse trend
now. In some cases this kind of actions is coming as a formidable hurdle in the
reconciliation efforts made by either well meaning people or the courts. and the sanctity
attached to the marriage in Hindu Religion and the statutory mandate that the courts try to
save the marriage through conciliatory efforts till last , are being buried neck-deep . It is
for the law commission and the parliament either to continue that provision ( section 498a
IPC ) in the same form or to make that offense non cognizable and bailable so that ill-
educated women of this country do not misuse the provision to harass innocent people for
the sin of contracting marriage with egoistic women”

1990 Punjab and Haryana High court observed in Jasbir Kaur vs. State of Haryana,
case as:
“It is known that an estranged wife will go to any extent to rope in as many relatives of
the husband as possible in a desperate effort to salvage whatever remains of an estranged
marriage.”79

Kanaraj vs. State of Punjab, the apex court observed as:

“for the fault of the husband the in-laws or other relatives cannot in all cases be held to be
involved. The acts attributed to such persons have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt

79 (1990)2 Rec Cri R 243

and they cannot be held responsible by mere conjectures and implications. The tendency
to rope in relatives of the husband as accused has to be curbed”80

Karnataka High Court, in the case of State Vs. Srikanth, observed as:
“Roping in of the whole of the family including brothers and sisters-in-law has to be
depreciated unless there is a specific material against these persons, it is down right on
the part of the police to include the whole of the family as accused”81

Supreme Court, In Mohd. Hoshan vs. State of A.P. case, observed as:
“Whether one spouse has been guilt of cruelty to the other is essentially a question of
fact. The impact of complaints, accusation or taunts on a person amounting to cruelty
depends on various factors like the sensitivity of the victim concerned, the social
background, the environment, education etc. Further, mental cruelty varies from person
to person depending on the intensity of the sensitivity, degree of courage and endurance
to withstand such cruelty. Each case has to be decided on its own facts whether mental
cruelty is made out”82

Delhi high Court, in Savitri Devi vs. Ramesh Chand, case observed as:
“These provisions were though made with good intentions but the implementation has
left a very bad taste and the move has been counter productive.83 There is a growing
tendency amongst the women which is further perpetuated by their parents and relatives
to rope in each and every relative including minors and even school going kids nearer or
distant relatives and in some cases against every person of the family of the husband
whether living away or in other town or abroad and married, unmarried sisters, sisters-in-
law, unmarried brothers, married uncles and in some cases grand parents or as many as
10 o 15 or even more relatives of the husband.”

80 2000 CriLJ 2993

81 2002 CriLJ 3605
82 2002 CriLJ 4124
83 2003 CriLJ 2759
Punjab and Haryana High Court, in Bhupinder Kaur and others vs. State of Punjab
and others, case observed as:
“From the reading of the FIR, it is evident that there is no specific allegation of any act
against petitioners Nos.2 and 3, which constitute offence under s.498-A I.P.C. I am
satisfied that these two persons have been falsely implicated in the present case, who
were minors at the time of marriage and even at the time of lodging the present FIR.
Neither of these two persons was alleged to have been entrusted with any dowry article
nor they alleged to have ever demanded any dowry article. No specific allegation of
demand of dowry,84 harassment and beating given to the complainant by the two accused
has been made. The allegations made are vague and general. Moreover, it cannot be
ignored that every member of the family of the husband has been implicated in the case.
The initiation of criminal proceedings against them in the present case is clearly an abuse
of the process of law”

Jharkhand High Court in Arjun Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand and another, case
observed as:
“In the instant case, it appears that that the criminal case has been filed, which is
manifestly intended with mala fide and ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the
accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.85

Punjab and Haryana High Court in Mukesh Rani Vs. State of Haryana observed
as:
The learned Single Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that:86
“Whenever there is a matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife for the fault of
husband other relations of the husband that is the brothers, sisters, parents are also roped
in the litigation on the allegation of demand of dowry, whether they are living jointly or
separate and sometimes even the parents who are aged 80 to 90 years and are unable to
walk or talk and the sisters living at far off places in the matrimonial house are involved.”

84 2003 CriLJ 3394

85 2004 CriLJ 2989
86 2002 (1) RCR (Criminal) 163
Delhi High Court in Anu Gill Vs. State & Anr. (Delhi) observed as:
The Honorable Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that:
“ 8. It has almost become a practice that whenever a police report is lodged consequent
upon a matrimonial discord, there is always a tendency on the part of the complainant to
involve practically all the relations of her in-laws’ family either out of vengeance or to
curl out appropriate settlement. Such a tendency ought to be deprecated.”87

Ramesh & Ors. Vs. State of Tamil Nadu observed as:

The Honorable Judge has observed that:
“The bald allegations made against her sister-in-law seem to suggest the anxiety of the
informant to rope in as many of the husband’s relations as possible.”88

Delhi High Court CHANDER KANTA LAMBA & ORS. observed as:
The Honorable Judge has observed that:
“18. In the light of the aforesaid proposition if one examines the authorities cited by the
learned Senior Counsel one cannot but agree that the proposition of law which is
enunciated in all these cases is that invariably whenever matrimonial relations have
turned sour there is a tendency on the part of the complainant whether it is done by her of
her own free will or at the instigation of her parents, brothers, sisters or even legal advice
to make all kinds of wild and reckless allegations against the entire family of the
husband.”

THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE-01/SOUTH,PATIALA HOUSE COURT

in Criminal Revision No. 88/2008/2002, observed as:

The Honorable Judge has watched that:

" It is settled legitimate position that dubious and uncovered statement7 can't be the
establishment for confining of charge. Since an inclination has developed to rope in other
relatives of the spouse in instances of 498-A, solid claims as to the date, the place, the

87 2001 (2) JCC

88 AIR 2005 SC 1989
way, the demonstration of brutality ought to be available in the confirmation keeping in
mind the end goal to outline a charge for offense under Section 498-A. As a result of the
present affinity to rope in pure people, the Trial Court must be watchful while confining
charge for offense under Section 498-A."

THE Panjab and harayana High Court in Krishan Jeet Singh vs State Of Haryana
on 3/10/2002, observed as:
The Honorable Judge has observed that:
“18. It is germane to mention here that the petitioner had stayed at her matrimonial home
only on four occasions during her marital life. These are from the date of marriage that is
February 18, 1991 till February 21, 1991, from February 22, 1991 to February 25, 1991,
from March 12, 1991 to March 14, 1991 and thereafter from June 15, 1991 to June 20,
1991. The total period of the stay of the petitioner at her matrimonial home as per her
own version was 13 days in all. It is the case of the petitioner that during her short stay at
her matrimonial home, she was given beating, abuses, and harassment on the point of
inadequate dowry given to her by her parents and further demand of dowry was made. It
is an admitted fact that the parties belong to Hissar. As can be gleaed from the evidence
led by the parties, the parties arc affluent and belong to families of high strata of society.
The father of the petitioner is Deputy Director in Ch. Charan Singh Haryana Agriculture
University, Hissar. The real uncle of the petitioner, Sh. Jawant Singh, was a Minister in
the State Government. The petitioner herself is educated. The respondent is also running
a restaurant in Hissar besides having agricultural land. With this background, this Court
is of opinion that in such a short span of 13 days, demand of dowry, as has been alleged
by the petitioner, could not have been made by the respondent or his family members. At
the risk of repetition, it is being mentioned that had it been so, the figure that is Rs. one
lac or two lacs or Rs. 11,000/- must have been referred to in the petition by the petitioner
which she did not for the reasons best known to her. This Court is conscious of a fact that
in these days when the number of divorce petitions are increasing in our society, this is
one of the easiest allegations to level against the husband by the wife. It is easy to level it
but it is very difficult to prove the same. It also appears obnoxious that a bride, as the
petitioner was, when left her parental home for her permanent home that is her husband’s
home after the marriage on February 18, 1991 and stayed there upto February 21, 1991
and during 2-3 days, she was given beating and abuses by the respondent and his family
members because it is in the rarest of rate cases that such bad treatment would be given to
the bride by the bridegroom or his family members, particularly having considered the
background of the families, as has been indicated above.”

THE Orrissa High Court in Benumadhab Padhi Mohapatra vs State on 28/8/2003,

observed as:
The Honorable Judge has observed that:
“But then, while dealing with the prosecution relating to such offences the Court cannot
close their eyes to the fact that the provisions are also misused by unscrupulous litigants
to satisfy their personal vendetta. Often being enraged, innocent relatives are roped in just
for the sake of harassment and taking revenge. In view of the aforesaid scenario the Court
has to be careful while dealing with cases involving dowry torture.”
 CHAPTER 5

CONLUSION: AND SUGGESTION

Marriage is the deliberate association for life of one man and one lady to the avoidance of
all others.' It is a social association where life partner has the commitment to fare thee
well and keep up his better half. He can't neglect his commitments or obligations. Yet, on
this awesome organization a shame called 'endowment' still exists. Women are abuseed,
badgering, slaughtered, separated for the basic reason that they didn't brought share.

The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was instituted to give a viable check to settlement
passings which were proceeding regardless of the then winning laws. The protest of the
Bill was to preclude the underhanded routine with regards to giving and taking of
endowment. Be that as it may, this goal was not accomplished; 739 Act 63 of 1984 w.e.f.
Oct. 2, 1985. 384 consequently intense revisions were acquired by changing different
arrangements of the said Act and the related arrangements under the Indian Penal Code
and the Indian Evidence Act. Prior, the meaning of 'settlement' which was restricted to
the time at or before the marriage was reached out to the period even after the marriage
by methods for Act 43 of 1986 w.e.f. November 19, 1986. Likewise, area 304B was
presented in the Indian Penal Code by methods for the same correcting Act.

Amid the most recent three decades, India has seen the rise of three extraordinary social
shades of malice, in particular:

(a) the settlement framework

(b) the savagery and badgering towomen

(c) the resultant suicide.

IPC Section 498a was initially intended to shield wedded Women from being bothered or
subjected to pitilessness by spouses as well as their relatives. This law was basically gone
for controling share badgering. Shockingly, this law has been abused to disturb men and
their families as opposed to ensure certifiable female casualties of provocation. The
Supreme Court of India itself has named the abuse of area 498a as "lawful psychological
oppression" and expressed that "numerous cases have become exposed where the
protestations are not real and have been documented with anoblique thought process. In
such cases, quittance of the denounced does not wipe out the shame endured amid and
before the preliminary. Now and again antagonistic media scope adds to the
hopelessness." IPC territory 498-A was at first expected to shield wedded Women from
being harassing or subjected to viciousness by life partners and moreover their relatives.
This law was basically away to check gift incitement. Appallingly, this law has been
mishandled to exasperate men and their families rather than guarantee veritable female
losses of incitement. The Supreme Court of India itself has denoted the manhandle of
territory 498-An as "legitimate mental abuse" and communicated that "numerous events
have turned out to be known where the discords are not honest to goodness and have been
recorded with a sideways aim.

In simultaneousness with the above verbalization, the disclosures of an examination

coordinated by The Center for Social Research demonstrated that 98 percent of the cases
recorded under IPC region 498a are false. Incidentally, the law has been always
supported in perspective of its objective of guaranteeing females. Presently in current
conditions it is beneficial to consider how IPC area 498-A has really influenced females.

 The need for Section 498A is more urgent than ever be-fore. Hence, Section 498A
must remain gender specific, non-bailable, cognizable and non-compoundable.
The pro vision is the only Section which acts as a preventive mechanism for
marital violence
 Dowry was a custom which was started in an ancient period. It has followed since
old times. Afterwards, the practice of dowry has stopped by enacted law by the
central government in India. It has started creating problem in daughter`s
marriage life. So the law was made to protect women from their matrimonial
house as there was an absence of knowledge in women and due to ill literate the
women were just suffers the pains from their matrimonial house. Section 498A
and dowry prohibition act was there to help and safeguard women. Afterwards
girls were started studying and they also educated. They knew the laws and learn
that how to use that laws against their men for permanent alimony and
maintenance. The women`s were framing a false charge under sec 498A IPC and
make her husband should be punished under the law. The men have no laws to
protect him against the exploitation from women. In a cases of district court also
seen that there is a misuse of section 498A IPC. The cases were still pending and
the husbands are paying maintenance to their wife just because he is husband
doesn`t mean that he is responsible for all the expenses and gains. The women
have become a sharper as comparison to men in society. They use this section as a
weapon to gain some money from it. Sec 498A is misused by wife to their
husband it is proved. ‘Discrimination of men under sec-498A IPC-myth or realty’
so I conclude, its reality. Section 498A IPC is misuse by the women to husbands
and in-laws. It is completed and already done with the results. It has reviewed that
Sec-498A gives harassment to men in the society people were agree and it has to
be change. It was seen that this section was partial to men. My survey report is
done and the cases of sec-498A IPC which I have research during my survey, the
cases of district court Raipur, were pending and it is correct that section 498A
protect women but now it is misuse by wife to their husband and in-laws. This
situation gets very bad impact to the society. Misuse of Section 498A IPC is not a
rumor it has proved. International Journal of Commerce and Management
Research, Toll Free: 1800-1234-070 36 IMS Business School Presents Doctoral
Colloquium – 2017 ISBN: 978-93-85895-57-9 Acknowledgement When a
mission is accomplished, it doesn't involve the work of a single person rather
combine efforts of a group of people and so does this mission which is a small
 step towards Discrimination of Men under Sec 498A of IPC. I want to show my
heartfelt gratitude to ITM University, Raipur for giving me an opportunity. And
also thank to my god who gave me blessings to learn it. Without guidance no
work can be completed so I also thank to my Guide who teach me at all the steps
of article so my work should be complete Mrs. Debashree Chakraboty Assistant
Professor ITM University who teach me and guide me. I really thank full to her.
Thanks to my parents also who gave me a motivation and specially thanks to my
father Ad. Kamlesh Pandey Who helped me to collect the cases and data from
District Court Raipur C.G. and also to fulfill my survey. Lastly thanks to all my
friends, who helped me to complete my article and thanks to all the people who
helped me for completing my work.

SUGGESTION

 As respects the usage of the settlement disallowance laws, usually claimed that
hostile to endowment enactment is watched more in rupture than in execution. In
any case, however the reality remains that share being a socio-legitimate issue, it
can't be handled by law alone except if individuals from the general public
approach and effectively participate with the law-authorization organizations to
subside this danger. There is additionally need to make social mindfulness and
prepare general sentiment against settlement through a concentrated instructive
program at all levels, especially in the country pockets. All the more as of late,
various willful nongovernmental offices and social associations are completing an
estimable work in helping the endowment casualties and uncovering the culprits
of settlement wrongdoings with the assistance of network help and direction, the
lawful guide specialists including the law educators and understudies ought to
likewise step up with regards to share destruction crusade through a concentrated
legitimate proficiency program in urban communities and towns as well as in
remote town territories also.

 In concurrence with the above proclamation, the discoveries of an examination

directed by The Center for Social Research demonstrated that 98 percent of the
 cases recorded under IPC Section 498a are false. All things considered, the law
has been constantly supported in view of its aim of ensuring Women. Now it is
advantageous to consider how IPC Section 498a has extremely influenced
Women. It has been contended by Government authorities supporting the law that
notwithstanding the foundation of lawful measures to counter badgering of
wedded Women, there is an expansion in the quantity of instances of provocation.
The initial Section of the announcement recommends that Women who are
irritated ought to use this law as a methods for insurance. In the event that
pestered Women in fact utilized the law then we should see a diminishing in the
quantity of instances of provocation after some time. Considering the stringent
results forced by the law and the over the top defers inborn in the lawful
framework, no standard subject, male or female, would be sufficiently impudent
to chance being ensnared under this law for fulfilling their financial or even cruel
wants so far as that is concerned. The truth of the matter is that numerous Women
who are really pummeled and pestered by their spouses and in-laws once in a
while record 498a or fall back on other settlement related laws.
 If there is violence against women under section 498-A, I.P.C. whole candidate of
family including husband, sick people and firm member. The court must use The
Criminal Procedure Code provision for granting exemption from physical
appearance to the accused on hearing so that to minimize the harassment
physically, as well as financially to the accused.

 The guarantee relatives of the spouse ought not be put in a correctional facility on
the grounds that a considerable measure of the relatives, who are blamed for the
wrongdoing, are some time minor, decrepit, seniority and exceptionally far off
relatives, who has nothing to do with share and savagery to the casualty and
besides, they are not even nearby/nation at the season of announced provocation.

 Hitched Women, who should take care of their family youngsters and add to the
welfare of the family are made to keep running starting with one court then onto
the next court either as complainant's or as denounced people. Keeping in mind
 the end goal to manage these cases betterly, compromise ought to be finished by a
legal officer and compromise focuses ought to be constituted by the High Courts
for this reason. The Judicial Officers incharge of these pacification certres might
be enabled to prescribe criminal arraignment on the off chance that they discover
compromise unrealistic between the gatherings.

 Accentuation ought to be given to advising of the gatherings amid the pre-case

and suit periods. Nonetheless, compromise ought not be sole goal of such
conselling and it ought to be remembered that the point of the enactment is to
anticipate abusive behavior at home and not to keep the family together
independent of the wellbeing and security of the lady.

 A three-level framework must be presented instead of the two level framework for
managing Women' issues. The level must comprise of educators and teachers as
guard dogs to guarantee compelling usage of character-building, training; the
level must incorporate consellors, particularly, elderly people and the level ought
to involve setting up isolated cells in all police headquarters, "kept an eye on" by
sharpened people to manage Women' issues.

 Need for introducing Counseling Center with too many prepared/sharpened

advisors under police headquarters, so Women could stand up their grievances
and look for fitting mediation from them. This would encourage conveyance of
equity 406 to poor Women casualties. Such focuses ought to be pitched with the
goal that open knows as to where they ought to go for help.