Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code was introduced with the aim of criminalising cruelty against women by their husband and his relatives, ensuring protection and justice for victims of domestic violence. However, an alarming trend has emerged where the provision is being misused by some women to settle personal scores with their husbands and relatives. This has led to a rise in frivolous and omnibus complaints, often implicating not only the husband but also his distant relatives. While courts have historically adopted a sensitive approach to such cases, the lodging of false complaints significantly delays justice for genuine victims of domestic abuse.

Despite recent amendments to Criminal Laws, the text of the new provisions in BNS remains a verbatim reproduction of Section 498A of the IPC. While cruelty by husband and his relative can inflict great mental and physical harm upon the victim but at the same time false allegation of upon husband and his relatives also causes humiliation and damage to the accused. An accused also has rights which are to be protected and the possibility of false implication has to be ruled out.

Courts across India have consistently expressed concern over misuse of Section 498-A of IPC and the increasing tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial dispute without analysing the long term ramifications of it. Apex Court in its numerous judgments underlined that authorities must endeavour to ensure that innocent persons are not made to suffer on account of baseless allegations.

The Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment in the matter “Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar” by issuing guidelines restraining police officials from automatically arresting the accused in 498-A Cases. Despite these guidelines, the provision continues to be misused, often leading to innocent individuals suffering the burden of proving their innocence. While courts have shown a willingness to quash false FIRs filed under Section 498-A IPC, the rate of quashing remains significantly lower compared to the number of such FIRs lodged. Courts have repeatedly emphasized the need to protect innocent individuals from baseless allegations, underscoring that authorities must exercise caution and diligence to prevent undue harassment.

The Apex Court in its judgment dated 10.12.2024 titled as “DARA LAKSHMI NARAYANA & OTHERS Vs STATE OF TELANGANA & ANOTHER” while quashing an FIR filed U/s 498-A of IPC by a wife against her husband and his relatives culled out as follows:

“….The inclusion of Section 498A of the IPC by way of an amendment was intended to curb cruelty inflicted on a woman by her husband and his family, ensuring swift intervention by the State. However, 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 an encouragement for use of arm twisting tactics by a wife and/or her family. 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. Consequently, this Court has, time and again, cautioned against prosecuting the husband and his family in the absence of a clear prima facie case against them.” (Para 28)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated 26.11.2024 titled as “Payal Sharma Vs. State of Punjab & Anr” has sounded a word of caution to the Courts to ensure that distant relatives of a husband are not unnecessarily implicated in criminal cases filed at the instance of wife alleging domestic cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

The Apex Court in its another judgment dated 21.10.2024 titled as “Yashodeep Bisanrao Vadode Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.” expressed dismay over exaggerated versions presented in Complaints filed U/s 498-A IPC. The Hon’ble Court set aside the conviction of a man (brother-in-law of deceased wife) under Sections 498A IPC, noting that there were no specific allegation and/or evidence against him. While acquitting the appellant, the Court held as follows:

“….In the contextual situation, it is only appropriate to keep reminded of the observations of this Court in the decision in Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand. This Court observed that it is a matter of common knowledge that exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number of complaints and the tendency of over implication is also reflected in a large number of cases. (Para 11)

We are of the view that in view of such circumstances, the courts have to be careful to identify instances of over implication and to avert the suffering of ignominy and inexpiable consequences, by such persons. (Para 12)”

The Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam vide its Order dated 30.05.2024 in the matter titled as “SHYAMALA BHASKER Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ANR” discussed the misuse of 498-A of IPC by women and held as follows:

“…The cases where no specific allegations to go for trial, prima facie, such cases shall be quashed by the High Court by invoking power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. At the same time, when specific allegations pointing out the overt acts which would attract the offence under Section 498A could be seen, prima facie, from the prosecution case, such cases shall not be quashed.” (Para 9)

Conclusion

The Courts have adopted a balanced approach in handling Section 498-A cases, ensuring sensitivity towards genuine victims of cruelty while addressing the rise in false and frivolous complaints. Courts have increasingly quashed FIRs in cases where no prima facie evidence exists, thereby safeguarding the rights of the accused and upholding the principle of justice.