Amidst a nationwide outrage over the suicide of Bengaluru techie Atul Subhash over alleged harassment by his wife and in-laws, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (11th December), hearing a different case, said that Section 498A which penalises cruelty by husband and his family against women, is being massively misused.
During the hearing of a case, the Supreme Court bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh noted that while some laws were originally meant to protect women against domestic violence and harassment, they are being widely misused by some women to compel husbands and their family into complying their unreasonable demands. Moreover, laws like Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code are being misused by some wives to unleash personal vendetta against husbands and their families.
Calling out the arm-twisting tactics, the court said, “Sometimes, recourse is taken to invoke Section 498A of the IPC against the husband and his family in order to seek compliance with the unreasonable demands of a wife. In recent years, as there have been a notable rise in matrimonial disputes across the country, accompanied by growing discord and tension within the institution of marriage, consequently, there has been a growing tendency to misuse provisions like Section 498A of the IPC as a tool for unleashing personal vendetta against the husband and his family by a wife. Making vague and generalised allegations during matrimonial conflicts, if not scrutinized, will lead to the misuse of legal processes and encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family.”
The apex court made these observations while setting aside a cruelty case filed against a man and his family under Section 498(A). The Telangana High Court had earlier refused to dismiss this case.
The Supreme Court further stated that the Telangana High Court “committed a grave error” in not rejecting the petition, alleging that it was submitted by the wife with ulterior motives to settle personal scores.
Quashing the case, the top court said, “We are not, for a moment, stating that any woman who has suffered cruelty in terms of what has been contemplated under Section 498A of the IPC should remain silent and forbear herself from making a complaint or initiating any criminal proceeding. That is not the intention of our aforesaid observations but we should not encourage a case like as in the present one, where as a counterblast to the petition for dissolution of marriage sought by the first appellant-husband of the second respondent herein, a complaint under Section 498A of the IPC is lodged by the latter.”
