CRUELTY AGAINST MARRIED WOMEN AND THE LEGAL

FRAMEWORK IN INDIA WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
ASHISH UPADHYAYA [ROLL NO. 33]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION: EMERGENCE OF THE CONCEPT OF “CRUELTY” AS A SOCIAL

EVIL ....................................................................................................................................... 2

REASONS BEHIND THE INSERTION OF THE PROVISION RELATED TO

CRUELTY UNDER INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 ............................................................ 6

SECTION 498A IPC, 1860: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS ..................................................... 11

CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 18

SUGGESTIONS................................................................................................................... 20

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................................ 21
INTRODUCTION: EMERGENCE OF THE CONCEPT OF “CRUELTY” AS A
SOCIAL EVIL
Cruelty is one of the serious kinds of social evil since ages.

Historical background:

India being multifaceted democracy discrimination can never be entertained on the social,
civil, political and economic rights guaranteed by the nation. Nevertheless owing to certain
broad situations where Indian women do cross the hurdles and participate in the social
activities.

Since time immemorial women have been reduced to a demeaning decorative character
endowed with superficial attractiveness but intellectually docile, who could only serve the
purpose of male entertainment. Because of the pristine orthodox hierarchical malpractices
they were encouraged to embody the role of mother, wife or that of a home maker only to be
pushed to live a confined life with restricted mobility or in worse cases to live in total
seclusion. In spite of India’s reputation of worshipping and treating women as Goddess
history reveals the dark bitter secret that is buried under the godly personification of women
which was only being used as a camouflage for securing the superior position of the male
members of the society indirectly. Since medieval times as women played a rather
subservient role in the society. Hence it is a fact that women are not respected in a true
manner earlier.

This can be proved from the instances of past, e.g. Sati i.e. self -immolation by a widow on
the pyre of the dead body of her husband. It is yet another phenomenon peculiar to an
illiterate, conservative and tradition bound society. It is nothing but a manifestation of the
barbaric attitude of man towards a helpless woman who becomes widow on the death of her
husband. The irony of fate is that instead of the poor woman getting solace, sympathy and
shelter to bear the tragic loss of her husband, she is forced to become or encouraged to be
sati. 1Thereby we may say that this practice of treating women in an inhuman manner leads to
the concept of Cruelty. Cruelty against women has been age-old phenomenon, where women
have been subjected to brutality and inexplicable exploitation for one reason or the
other.Cruelty can be both mental as well as physical cruelty which is being practiced in
different modes in the society in different circumstances. Here for the purpose of the

1
K.D.Gaur, “The poor victim of uses and abuses of criminal law and process in India”, 27 Indian Bar Review 39
(2000)
research, the researcher is going to look into the effects of cruelty from the perspective of
matrimonial relationship.

Under Old English law, according to Blackstone,a husband could correct his wife by beating.
E.g. a husband broke the legs of his wife since she had disregarded his instructions to visit a
particular place.2 In Holmes v. Holmes,3the husband used to assault and abuse his wife and on
occasion he insisted upon sexual intercourse with her in the presence of two men and
threatened that if she refused, the men would hold her down. In spite of all this, the wife was
held not to be entitled to any relief on the ground of cruelty. This was the poor condition of
justice then under old English law.

According to Manu, a husband should beat his wife only with a rope or split bamboo, so that
no bones are broken in the process.4

Concept of cruelty:

Cruelty is an abstract concept, there is no specific definition or explanation given by any

jurist. Cruelty can be of different forms such as mental, physical, direct or indirect, intended
or unintended. It also depends upon different factors and circumstances such as social-
cultural background of the woman, mental and physical conditions, etc.

The Supreme Court of India through various decisions has explained the concept of cruelty
such as:

 In N.G. Dastane v. S. Dastane, the Supreme Court has observed that conduct charged
as cruelty should be of such a character as to cause in the mind of the Petitioner, a
reasonable apprehension that it is harmful or injurious to live with the respondent.5
 In V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat, the Supreme Court held that the mental cruelty must be of
such a nature that the parties cannot be reasonable be expected to live together. While
arriving at such conclusion regard must be had to the social status, educational level
of the parties, the society they move in and all other relevant facts and circumstances.6
 In NeeluKohli v. Naveen Kohli, it was held by the apex court that in order to constitute
cruelty the acts complained of as causing cruelty must be more serious than ordinary

2
Kusum, Family Law Lectures, 59 (Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa 2nd ed. 2008)
3
(1755)2 Lee; 161 ER 283
4
Ibid.
5
(1975)2 SCC 326
6
(1994)1 SCC 337
 wear and tear of marriage. Not any and every abnormal act of the other party can be
viewed as mental cruelty. 7
 In A. Jayachandra v. Aneel Kaur, the apex court held that for physical cruelty there
can be tangible and direct evidence but in mental cruelty there may not be direct
evidence. When there is no direct evidence, courts are required to probe into the
mental process and mental effect of incidence that are brought out in evidence.8
 In Vinitha Saxena v.Pankaj Pandit, the Supreme Court held that what constitutes
mental cruelty will not depend upon the numerical count of such incidents or only on
the continuous course of such conduct, but really go by the intensity, gravity and
stigmatic impact of it when meted out even once and deleterious effect of it in the
mental attitude, necessary for maintaining a conducive matrimonial home.9

Few instances of cruelty as a social evil in modern era.

 Slow starvation - is cruelty: The wife was compelled to do all the domestic works
single handed. She was ill-treated and subjected to physical assault when she
protested. She was not getting sufficient food and it resulted in slow starvation,
thereby giving an emaciated look, to meet an unlawful demand of money. When she
committed suicide cruelty stood proved in a court of law.10
 Repeated demands of dowry amounts to cruelty: If repeated demands of dowry are
made and harassment is meted out to a woman, which may be physical or mental, it is
an act of cruelty.11
 False allegations in litigation amounts to cruelty: The wife was subjected to a series
of malicious and vexatious litigations in which extremely hurtful and offensive
accusations were leveled against the wife of a sense of vindictiveness and wherein she
was humiliated and tortured through the execution of search warrants and seizure of
her personal property. These very acts when repeated and carried on, constitute
cruelty of an intense degree.12
 Repeated taunts calling her ugly and mal treatment is cruelty:The wife was ill-
treated from the next day of marriage and she was repeatedly taunted and mal-treated

7
AIR 2006 SC 1675
8
(2005)2 SCC 22
9
(2006)3 SCC 778
10
Hira Choudhary v. State of West Bengal, 1997 (1) WLC 543
11
Jagdish v. State of Rajasthan, 1998 RCR (Cr) 9
12
Smt. M.M.Chitnis v. Mr. M.M. Chitnis, 1991 (2) Maharastra L.R. 753
 and mentally tortured by calling her ugly etc. This amounts to cruelty, mental torture
for any bride.13
 Neglect by husband also amounts to cruelty:the act of the husband was only that of
disregarding his duty to provide the wife and the child elementary means of
sustenance while he himself was squandering his earnings on gambling and other
vices and was starving his wife and infant child to death. 14
 Non-return of stridhan amounts to cruelty: non-return of stridhan by the husband
and hi relatives amounts to cruelty.15
 Cruelty by non-acceptance of baby girl:The conduct of the accused husband and his
father is not accepting the birth of the baby girl was held as amounting to cruelty. 16

*********

13
Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana J.T. 1998 (1) SC- 565
14
State of Karnataka v. Moorthy 2002 Cr. L.J. 1683
15
Surender Yadav v. State of Delhi (DB) All C.L.R 2000(2) 160
16
State of Karnataka v. Balappa, 1999 Cr. LJ 3064 (Kant)
REASONS BEHIND THE INSERTION OF THE PROVISION RELATED TO
CRUELTY UNDER INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860
‘The judiciary must not take on the coloration of whatever may be popular at that moment,
we are the guardian of rights, and we have to tell people things they often do not like to hear’
---Rose Elizabeth Bird, the 25th Chief Justice of California once said that.17 Thus judiciary in
its role as a guardian of the nation is essentially handicapped to tilt in favour of a particular
sex but on the contrary it is expected that its belief system should not sway with the popular
frenzy of speculation endorsed by the crowd and media.

Witnessing the vulnerable condition of women where they were being subject to relentless
mental trauma physical torture and character assassination because of their inability to pay
such cosmic demands of dowry made the poor fuming crowd to sling mud at court. This
wrath and fury of the common masses grew strong when the immeasurable bride burning
cases in open daylight across the nation started showing thumbs to the judiciary.

With the intention of curbing this heinous crime of dowry harassment and dowry deaths
Parliament in 1986 inserted the section 304B to prevent the murder following the dowry and
in the year 1983(25th December) Section 498A was incorporated within Indian Penal Code
with the intention of defining ‘cruelty’ and ‘harassment’ which has been a common
phenomenon in a matrimonial relationship.

Parliament has inserted a new Chapter XXA titled ‘of cruelty by husband or relatives of
husband’ in Indian Penal Code, 1860 in order to make cruelty against women punishable.

Section 498A of IPC, 1860 i.e. “HUSBAND OR RELATIVE OF HUSBAND OF A

WOMAN SUBJECTING HER TO CRUELTY” reads as—

‘Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such
woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three
years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation: For the 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;
17
Rose Elizabeth Bird, Chief Justice of California (1936-1999) Brown, Patrick. "The Rise and Fall of Rose
Bird, A Career Killed by the Death Penalty"
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.’

Ingredients of the provision are as follows:

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

Section 498A is a cognizable, non-bailable and non-compoundable criminal offence. A

close analysis of the section makes it clear that the entire section is founded upon four basic
question of law they are as follows:-

 Any action, gesture or conduct that is likely to drive a woman to commit suicide.
 Any action, gesture or conduct that is likely to cause grave injury to the life, limb or
health of a woman
 Harassment caused to the woman and her family with the intention of extracting some
property
 Harassment caused to the woman and her family in the event of not being able to or
not in agreement to yield to the demand of money or of any property.

In 1989 the nation witnessed two historic cases where in 20th April,1989 Justice Natrajan, in
the case of BrijLal v. Prem Chand18 reversed the High Court’s order which acquitted the
accused since there was no record exhibiting that the murder of the bride, VeenaRai was
instigated by the accused. The Apex Court condemning the verdict of the High Court, ruled
that the abetment of commission of suicide was only due to the instigation which therefore
invites the first clause of section 107 IPC, 1860 19 . Justice Natrajan also precipitated his

18
1989 AIR 1661
19
Section 107 reads as Abetment of a thing. -- A person abets the doing of a thing, who- First- Instigates any
person to do that thing; or Secondly. - Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for
the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to
the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.- Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing.
Explanation 1.- A person who, by wilful misrepresentation, or by wilful concealment of a material fact which he
is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to
instigate the doing of that thing. Illustration A, a public officer, is authorized by a warrant from a Court of.
disappointment on witnessing the degradation of society due to the inimical social structure
created by the depraved and unscrupulous husbands and their relatives with their
unconscionable limitless demands of dowry. With grave disappointment and presumption of
a dark future, the Apex court proclaimed its stratagem of adducing section 113A and 113B20
of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 to corroborate section 498A, with the intention of
accentuating two focal points:

 That the woman had committed suicide within a period of seven years of marriage
 That the husband or relation had subjected her to cruelty

However this was the first genuine endeavour made by the judiciary to curb this
parochialsocial menace which further seeks the attention of section 306 IPC, 1860.21

On September 26, 1989 the whole nation was astounded when the case of Ravinder Kaur,
daughter of Gurbachan Singh22 made headlines who was burnt to death after being tortured
brutally ever since she was married seven months earlier. Justice B.C. Ray and
SabyasachiMukherji ruled that in suicidal cases since direct evidences are implausible,
abetment and instigation can be established by circumstantial evidence. Ravinder Kaur who
was six months pregnant was a victim of atrocious and inhumane torture by her husband and
in-laws Harbhajan Singh and Kanwaldip Kaur, associated with the incessant taunting in front
of family friends accusing that she had illegitimate child in her womb combined with
repeated threatening that she would be thrown out of the house in the event of not paying the
amount of dowry which was due. On June 23, 1983 she confessed her father about her brutal
sufferings and two days later on June 25th around 2.30pm the painful sound of her screaming
went silent when she suffered third degree burn in her in-laws house which was reported to
her parents around 6.30 pm .Shockingly the High Court on the grounds of technicality of law
and minor contradictions acquitted all three accused since there was no evidence of

20
Section 113A- When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a women had been abetted by her
husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven
years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband has subjected her to
cruelty, the court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had
been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband.
Section 113B- When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a women and it is
shown that soon before her death such woman had 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.
21
Section 306 IPC, 1860: If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the commission of such suicide, shall
be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be
liable to fine.
22
1990 AIR 209,1989
instigation or abetment was found. Mr.Gurbachan Singh determined to give justice to her girl
child appealed to the Supreme Court which proved to be fruitful. Taking a sympathetic stance
Supreme Court ruled that “persistent demands of the accused for more money, their tortures
and taunts amounted to instigation and abetment that compelled her to do away with her life.”
The court gave its rulings based on section 113A of the Evidence Act which states that when
a married woman commits suicide within a stipulated duration of seven years and it is proved
that such woman was subject to mental and physical torture or cruelty by her husband and in-
laws, considering all the facts and circumstances of the case the court may presume that her
suicide had been abetted by those persons who treated her with cruelty. Quite sadly this
expansive interpretation of the term ‘cruelty’ was appended to the Act a few months after
Ravinder died, although the Court dictated that it has retrospective effect.

Constitutional validity:

Interestingly in the case of Inder Raj Malik v. Sunita Malik,23 the Court held that Sec 498A is
violative of Article 14 and 20(2) of the Constitution since it gives arbitrary powers in the
hands of the Court and it also criticized that the distinction drawn between ‘cruelty’ and
‘harassment’ is ambiguous and vague. Moreover it contradicts with Art 20(2) of the
Constitution as Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 has already made demand of
dowry a punishable act and inadvertently creates a situation of double jeopardy. However
Delhi High Court negating such contention held that Sec 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is
different from that of the 498A IPC, 1860 since in the former mere demand of dowry is
punishable and it does not necessarily need to establish the factor of ‘cruelty’ however the
latter case essentially deals with much graver heinous crime.

Retrospective effect of section 498A Indian penal code 1860:

Section 498A IPC, 1860 is not retrospective in nature and no such cognizance can be taken
under this section in case the offence was committed before the enforcement of the section.24

Co-relation between section 302 and 498A Indian penal code 1860:

In ThatiKonda v. State of A.P. 25there was a quarrel between the wife and the husband and the
husband wanted to perform second marriage. It was a strong circumstance for the wife to

23
1986 (92) CRLJ 1510
24
K.Subramaniam v. State, 1989 (1) Hindu L.R. (Mad) 63
25
1992 (1)Crimes 1114
commit suicide and for the husband to do away with his wife. As favourable view to the
accused is to be taken and it is clear that the husband wanted to marry 2nd time, it amounts to
cruelty.

Co-relation between section 304b and 498A Indian penal code 1860:

The two provisions are not mutually inclusive. They deal with different and distinct offences.
Persons charged under section 304B but acquitted can be convicted under section 498A IPC,
1860 even in absence of any charge. The deceased have been subjected to cruelty by her
husband and mother-in-law over the demand of maruti car as dowry and persistently pressed
by them after about six months of the marriage and continue till her death. Accused was
convicted under 304B and 498A IPC, 1860.26

Co-relation between section 306 and section 498A Indian penal code, 1860:

Distinction between section 306 IPC, 1860 and section 498A IPC, 1860 is that of intention.
Under the latter, cruelty committed by the husband of his relations drag the woman
concerned to commit suicide, while under the former provision suicide is abetted and
intended.27

*********

26
Satya Narayan Tiwari v. State of U.P., 2011 Cri. LJ 445
27
Satish Kumar Batra v. State of Haryana, AIR 2009 SC 2180
SECTION 498A IPC, 1860: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
The following chapter talks about the pros and cons of section 498A Indian Penal Code,
1860.

A step towards social reform:

In the first few years of its proclamation section 498A seemed to be quite fruitful and
effective in combating the heinous act of cruelty in the latter half of the 20th century. The
researcher while studying various cases have found out that the concept of cruelty has been
interpreted in no. of ways by the judiciary so we will go through a series of judgement where
section 498A whose main object of insertion in 1983 is ‘to punish the husband and his
relatives who tortures and harass women with a view to coerce her or any person related to
her to meet any unlawful demands’ 28 being adequately corroborated.

 In case of State of West Bengal v. Orilal Jaiswal29, the wife committed suicide by
hanging in the house of her in-laws within one year of her marriage and she was
subjected to cruelty and mental and physical torture by mother-in-law and the
husband.
So here in this particular case, the court after going through the facts of the case stated
it is a clear case of mental and physical cruelty and it is cognizable under Section
498A IPC, 1860.
 In case of State of Karnataka v. C.Prakash 30, there was a conclusive evidence on
record that the husband assaulted the wife because of some non-payments and as a
result finally wife committed suicide.
The Court held that such acts of the husband are the acts of cruelty and they are grave
and persistent according to the facts of the case hence accused was found liable to
conviction.
 In case of Rajesh Dewan v. State of Del.31Husband use to beat his wife in the presence
of his sister and sister’s husband, soon the wife left the matrimonial home and filed a
case against the husband and the in-laws.
The court held that cruelty against the wife is proved and an offence is made out
against the husband, sister of the husband, and sister’s husband under Section 498A

28
LV Jadhav v. SA Pawar 1983 Cr LJ 150
29
AIR 1994 SC 1418
30
1998 (1) Hindu L.R. (KAR) (DB) 185
31
1999 (2) Hindu L.R. (Del) 250
 IPC, 1860. Here in this case increased the ambit of the punishment by including the
abettor of the cruelty i.e. in-laws.
 In case of State v. Siddaraju32, husband contracted second marriage during the life
time of his first wife, who was living in the same house, hence it constituted cruelty as
held by the court.
 In case of Saifan Rahimsaheb Shaikh v. State of Maharastra33 the wife was treated
with cruelty as she could not bear a child after marriage and hence the court on the
grounds of cruelty proven under Section 498A IPC, 1860 convicted the accused.
 In case of Maeyaea Vishvanatha Rao v. State of A.P.34here wife died of burn injury. A
letter written by her revealed anguish about various incidents and methods of
harassments, caused by the accused, which not only included demand of dowry but
also filthiest possible language. This facts were supported by oral evidence by the
prosecution hence the court held the accused to be convicted under section 498A IPC,
1860.
 In case of Yaldapati Kutumba v. State 35 husband suspected the character of the
deceased, he too suspected that she was pregnant through somebody else; hence the
court held such statements amounts to cruelty.
 In case of State of U.P. v. Ramesh Prasad Mishra36the court held that the accused is
being convicted u/s 498A IPC, 1860 as it was found that the victim was harassed and
subjected to cruelty.
 In case of Odeti Ram Reddy v. State of A.P. 37here the husband use to beat his wife
time and again, and wife informed this to her parents and other witnesses, later she
committed suicide. The court held that the letters sent by the wife to her parents
revealed that she was subjected to cruelty for non-fulfillment of additional dowry
hence the guilt of the accused i.e. husband is proved beyond doubt and convicted.
 In case of Kodadi Srinivasa v. State of A.P.38here the in-laws of the bride treated her
with cruelty. They refused to send her to parents which is a kind of mental torture
exercised on her. The court held that in-laws were found guilty of the offence under
section 498A IPC, 1860.

32
2001 (1) Hindu L.R. (KAR) 660
33
2001 (1) Hindu L.R. (Bom) 624
34
2003 Cr. L.J. NOC 11B (A.P.)
35
2003 Cr. L.J. 4220 (AP)
36
1996 SCC (Cr.) 1278
37
2002 Cr. L.J. (NOC) 221 (AP)
38
2001 (2) DMC 708
There are numerous cases of cruelty exercised upon the married women in their matrimonial
homes on account of dowry or anything else, such acts are huge in number and Section 498A
IPC, 1860 steps in and plays an important role in curbing out this menace and bring a social
reform in real sense.

Misuse of section 498A Indian penal code 1860:

“The highhanded behaviour of the laws and the breakup of the marriage has another side.
Lodging of cases with the crime against women cell may not be genuine. Matrimonial
discords unconnected with dowry demands or dowry related harassment are often given the
colour of dowry by the wives to get even with their husbands.”39

A critical study of the section 498A reveals that a provision which was originally designed to
protect the bride from being harassed and physically tortured by the husbands or relatives
unfortunately has been abused to hassle the husband and his family.

The Supreme Court in one of its rulings said that -“But by misuse of the provision (IPC, 1860
498A - Dowry and Cruelty Law) a new legal terrorism can be unleashed. The provision is
intended to be used as a shield and not an assassin’s weapon”.40

Section 498A IPC, 1860 sometimes said to be ‘gender-biased’lawbecause recent study

reveals that the provision provides protection only to women in the fight against husband and
his relatives. A number of cases have been filed in the police station which forms the basis
for the official statistics of dowry harassment, which otherwise implicates that only the
woman are entitled to file harassment cases with an unlimited scope of fabricating stories and
lies without even undergoing any penalty to pay compensation or any kind of damages. It is
true that a careful reading of the section exposes some serious problems which can affect the
society:
1) Since only the women are entitled to file harassment cases there ought to be a grave abuse
of this section in the effect of harassing the husband and his family
2) The law framers at the time of enacting this provision did not envisage that it is actually
doing injustice to two sets of people:
a) The real victims of the dowry harassment are now being criticized to make false claims
and accusations.

39
Poonam Pradhan Saxena , (Annual survey of Indian law vol xxxvi, 2000)
40
Sushil Kumar Sharma v. UOI,JT 2005 (6) SCC 266
b) The mothers, sisters of the husband who are either harassed by the police or send to the
police custody without even considering their age, health and marital status. There are
instances where even the pregnant women have been sent behind the bars owing to the false
accusations thrown at the husband’s family by the wife.

A research conducted by some social activists reveals that urban well educated women are
taking advantage of the section 498A in order to reside independently, separated from the
husband and his family right after the husband’s family submit to her demands which
generally involves either cash or property and the provision of section 498A is such that the
husband cannot even file a complaint or even if they do they are not entertained solely on the
reasons that the law is applied only for the protection of women and not men41. That’s why
the section incurred the infamy of ‘legal terrorism’ since it has the peculiarity of tilting
towards the woman and becomes an evil provision when fall into wrong hands.

Real scenario in modern times in cases related to Section 498A IPC, 1860 and the attitude of
Law Enforcing authorities:

A careful examination of recent cases presents a rather horrifying picture. The researcher has
attempted to draw a difference between the existing law and the actual practice in relation to
the 498A cases.

NATURE OF CRIME IN LEGAL TERMS IN ACTUAL TERMS

Cognizable As per law it is the duty of Instead of initiating the
policeman to register the investigation they arrest the
offence as cognizable and suspects (husband and his
start investigation. family) more so in exchange
of bribes from both the sides.
Non-Bailable By law Magistrate is Before presenting the
bestowed with the power to individual in Magistrate‘s
refuse bail and send the court all sorts of gambles
individual to judicial or take place involving
police custody settlement of cases by paying
huge amount of money.

41
An investigative report by a NGO called Rakshak, The Silent Tears of Shattered Families: The Ugly Reality
of Dowry Law.
 There are other instances too
where the Magistrate ,public
prosecutor and the policemen
all conjointly decides to settle
the case with the husband
and his family being locked
up inside the police custody

Thus it is transparent from here that the provision itself is hosting bulk of loopholes and
possibly can threaten the institution of marriage. The corrupt police personnel and the judicial
officers of lower rank are also filling their pockets with the good amount of money they
receive from both the sides.

Why do people misuse the provision 498A IPC, 1860? 42

There are certain specific reasons stated below:

a. Legal Extortion – Get-rich-quick-scheme to extort large amounts of money

b. Prior Relationship – Wife has a prior relationship, and cannot get out of it. She
marries to satisfy her parents, and then misuses the 498a law in order to obtain a
divorce.
c. Adultery – Women who indulge in adultery use 498a as a bargaining tool
d. Domination – Wife wants the husband to abandon his parents and siblings, and have
total control over his finances and social behavior.
e. Custody - Deny the father and his family access to their children.
f. Fraudulent Marriages - in which the bride (and her family) hides her education level
or mental health; and when is justifiably asked to release the person who has gone
into marriage without knowing the full facts; she files a false 498a case.

In order to stop this menace Supreme Court in 2007 in case of Srinivasalu v. State of
A.P43held that consequences of cruelty that are likely to drive women to commit suicide or to
cause grave injury or danger to her life must be established before arresting the husband and

42
An investigative report by a NGO called Rakshak, The Silent Tears of Shattered Families: The Ugly Reality
of Dowry Law.
43
Appeal (Crl.) 11 of 2002
his relatives .The FIR must only be taken if there is a sufficient reason to believe that some
gross action of violence has been committed by the husband towards the wife.

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, 1860 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’. 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, 1860 is subject to gross misuse.

There is a gross violation or misuse of this penal provision as with the womenfrivolously
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 women and placing the man behind bars. Like in the case
of Savitri Devi v Ramesh Chand &Ors 44the court held clearly that there was amisuse and
exploitation of the provisions to such an extent that it was hitting at the foundation
ofmarriage itself and proved to be not so good for health of society at large. The court
believed thatauthorities and lawmakers had to review the situation and legal provisions to
prevent such fromtaking place.

So the question arises that 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?

In case of Saritha v R. Ramachandran45here 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. Suppose if the suggestion given by the court is approved then it would give a fair
chance to the men 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, 1860then even if the man
is innocent he does not get justice and ‘justice delayed is justice denied’. Therefore, the

44
II (2003) DMC 328
45
I (2003) DMC 37 (DB)
lawmakers must suggest some way of making this section non-biased to any individual such
that the guilty is punished and the person wronged is given justice.

Views of the Judiciary in the Recent Judgement in respect of misuse of Section 498A I.P.C.
1860:

In case of Jasbir Kaur vs. State of Haryana46 the Punjab and Haryana High court observed “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”

In case of Kanaraj vs. State of Punjab47the apex court observed that “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 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”

The Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Hoshan vs. State of A.P.48 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.”

*********

46
(1990)2 Rec Cri R 243
47
2000 Cri LJ 2993
48
2002 Cri LJ 4124
CONCLUSION
The institution of marriage is no longer considered a sacred union of two hearts but has rather
become more of a civil contract between two individuals in literal sense of the term where
one is obligated to another to perform conjugal rights.

Section 498A which has otherwise incurred the infamy ofbeing a ‘legal terrorism’ was
primarily incorporated to combat the evil practices of dowry and dowry deaths. But recent
study shows that over the years it has changed its colour and has become a weapon of
notoriety. With the help of books of distinguished legal personalities and eminent lawyers,
articles written or published by social activists the researcher has formulated some hypothesis
in regard to the curbing of this social cancer.

The inclusion of Section 498A IPC, 1860 though seemed fruitful and effective in the early
years of its proclamation unfortunately a new era of ruthlessness emerged with the arrival of
21st century. Although judiciary has failed miserably in curbing the gross abuse of Section
498A nevertheless the very provision calls for an immediate redressal to the sufferings of the
real victims of dowry harassment. The protection should also be extended to male members
of the society as recent study shows countless innocent husbands and their families have been
affected by this stringent provision since the section provides shelter only to women
rendering the provision to be biased, discriminatory and unconstitutional.

Anyone who has been awake the last two decades knows how section 498-A of IPC, 1860
has been heavily misused, dragging innocent men and women into police stations, lock-ups
and courts, thus depriving may young children of a happy childhood, many youth of
productive careers and many senior citizens of mental peace in the last leg of their lives.

Many women who really need protection from Domestic Violence will probably never know
about it and even if they do, never use it. This law will be yet another weapon in the hands of
unscrupulous women who will misuse it at the slightest opportunity. When a man is thrown
out of his own house under true or false allegations of domestic violence or cruelty everyone
who is dependent on him is bound to suffer. It is unfair enough to penalize an entire family
even if an accused man is truly abusive. Unfair is a subtle word to describe a situation in
which an innocent man, along with his family, is tortured by misuse of law.

After the entire study we can conclude that though Section 498-A of IPC, 1860 was brought
in forth for the protection of women from the cruelty of her husband and his relatives but now
it is being abused. These women are turning the law other way round by being cruel to their
husband and his relatives and getting them tried under Section 498A of IPC, 1860 which
deals with “Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband”. Henceforth certain legal actions
should be taken as soon as possible to curtail growth of “legal terrorism”, by misuse of
provisions of law.

*********
SUGGESTIONS
The following are thesuggestions or recommendations posed by the researcher towards the
research problem:-

 Firstly,in India, the trial of criminal cases especially of serious nature continues for 8
to 10 years if not more depending on the gravity of crime. But a speedy trial is
advisable so that the innocent victims entrapped under the section of 498A gets
prompt redressal. Therefore it is of utmost importance that besides being effective the
judiciary must try to expedite the process of trial with regard to the 498A cases.
 Secondly, an effort must also be made so that the investigation regarding this 498A
cases is operated only by civil authorities and only on the finding of reasonable
evidence, enough to establish the individual’s crime, should the policeman take
actions against him.
 Thirdly,the provision laid down under section 498A IPC, 1860 needs an immediate
amendment and it should be one of the major concerns of the law-makers in recent
times.
 Fourthly, in our nation there is no proper formal organization who offers family
counselling. Establishment of a recognized family counselling organization is
essential so that the individuals can vent out their grief and can also take the advice of
experts and practitioners.
 Fifthly,the NGO’s associated with the human rights activities must join hands to act
in a neutral manner and should educate the crowd of not filing criminal cases based
on trivial matters.
 Sixthly, a genuine endeavor must be made so that 498A cases are continued as
bailable offence and not non-bailable to prevent the innocent ones from languishing in
custody.
 Seventhly, The Court should start imposing penalty and stringent actions must be
taken against the individual for making false accusations since this section lacks the
deterrent element for which the dowry cases are increasing at such alarming level.
 Eighthly, strong actions must be taken against the dishonest, corrupted police
officers; they must either be penalized or suspended from their posts if it becomes
evident that there has been a gross negligence of duty on their part.
********
BIBLIOGRAPHY
 Books:
1. Author: Kusum, Family law lectures, Family law-I, Published by LexisNexis
Butterworth Wadhwa, Nagpur, Edition 2nd (2008)
2. Author: J.D. Chandna, Law relating to dowry deaths dying declaration suicides &
cruelties to women, Published by the Bright Law House, Delhi, Edition 1st (2005)
3. Author: Ratanlal Ranchoddas and Dhirajlal Keshavlal Thakore, Indian penal code
Published by LexisNexis, Edition 34th, (2014)
4. Author: K.D.Gaur, Textbook on the Indian penal code, Published by Universal Law
Publishing Co. Edition 4th (2009)
5. Author: K.D.Gaur, Criminal law: cases and materials, Published by LexisNexis
Publications, Edition 7th, (2013)
6. Author: Mamta Rao, Law relating to women and children, Published by Eastern Book
Company, Edition 3rd, (2012)
7. Author: S.R.Myneni, Legal research methodology Published by Allahabad Law
Agency, Edition 5th 2012.
8. Author: T.Padma and KPC Rao, Legal research methodology, Published by New
Age International Publishers, Edition 3rd, 2014
9. Author: C.K.Kothari and Gaurav Garg. Research methodology, methods and
techniques, Published by New Age International Publishers, Edition 3rd, 2014

 Articles:
1. Author: K.D.Gaur, The poor victim of uses and abuses of criminal law and process in
India, Published in Indian Bar Review by the (BCI) Trust, Vol. XXVII, (July- Dec)
(2000)
2. Author: Poonam Pradhan Saxena, Family law and settlement, Published in Annual
Survey of Indian Law by ILI, Vol. XXXVI, 2000

 Websites:
1. http://www.498a.org/
2. http://www.saveindianfamily.org/

*********