New Delhi: The suicide of 34-year-old Bengaluru techie Atul Subhash has once again raised questions on the misuse of laws related to dowry and domestic violence. The techie, who left behind a 24-page death note and video message, committed suicide allegedly due to mental harassment arising out of multiple cases related to matrimonial dispute lodged against him by his wife.
There have been debates and discussions on the misuse of section 498 A, which deals with husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty, of Indian Penal Code (IPC) at various platforms, including social media following the suicide of the Bengaluru techie. It is not that the misuse of the said provision has grabbed attention after the suicide of the techie, the misused of the law has been earlier flagged by the several courts, including the Supreme Court and various high courts.
What does section 498A of IPC provide?
As per the section, 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. Cruelty for the purposes of this section means 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 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.
The section 498 A was included in the IPC by way of an amendment with an intention to curb cruelty on a woman by her husband and his family and relatives, however, the Supreme Court and various high courts have in many verdicts flagged the tendency of implicating husband and all his immediate relations as a tool for unleashing personal vendetta against the husband and his family by a wife.
Large number of complaints are not even bona fide and filed with oblique motive, Apex Court said in a 2010 verdict
The Supreme Court, in a judgment delivered in 2010 in the case of Preeti Gupta versus State of Jharkhand observed that it has come across a large number of complaints registered under the section 498A of IPC which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. The top court said in the verdict that “A serious relook of the entire provision is warranted by the legislation. It is also a matter of common knowledge that exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number of complaints. The tendency of over implication is also reflected in a very large number of cases.”
Police machinery cannot be utilised for purpose of holding husband at ransom, Apex Court said in a 2024 verdict
The apex court in a verdict in Achin Gupta versus State of Haryana this year said that the Police machinery cannot be utilised for the purpose of holding the husband at ransom so that he could be squeezed by the wife at the instigation of her parents or relatives or friends and in all cases, where wife complains of harassment or ill-treatment, section 498A of the IPC cannot be applied mechanically. Every matrimonial conduct, which may cause annoyance to the other, may not amount to cruelty and mere trivial irritations, quarrels between spouses, which happen in day-to-day married life, may also not amount to cruelty, the apex court added.
Apex Court in its 2024 verdict requested legislature to look into the issue
The apex court, while quashing the proceedings against the husband arising out of a complaint lodged by the wife, also mentioned its judgment in Preeti Gupta versus State of Jharkhand requested the legislature “to look into the issue as highlighted above taking into consideration the pragmatic realities and consider making necessary changes in sections 85 and 86 respectively of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, before both the new provisions come into force.”
The top court direct the Registry to send one copy each of the judgment to the Union law secretary and Union home secretary to the Government of India who may place it before the Minister for Law and Justice as well as the Minister for Home.
Courts must exercise caution in such cases to prevent misuse of legal provisions, Apex Court said in a verdict this month
The apex court, in a judgment this month, quashed a case filed by a wife against her husband and his family members for dowry and harassment, observing that there is often a tendency to implicate all the members of the family of the husband when domestic disputes arise out of a matrimonial discord. It said that courts must exercise caution in such cases to prevent misuse of legal provisions and the legal process and avoid unnecessary harassment of innocent family members.
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has also been filed in the Supreme Court this week in the wake of the suicide of the Bengaluru techie seeking direction to constitute an expert committee of retired judges, lawyers and eminent legal jurists headed by a former top court judge to review and reform the existing dowry and domestic violence laws and curb its misuse.
