The Crossbill Team
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 15) upheld the constitutionality of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which criminalizes cruelty towards women by their husbands or in-laws.
The court dismissed a petition seeking a preliminary police investigation before filing a First Information Report (FIR) under the anti-dowry law, citing concerns over its alleged misuse in matrimonial disputes.
A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh found no merit in the petition, which argued that Section 498A violated Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. The court clarified that Article 15 of the Constitution specifically empowers the enactment of special laws for the protection of women.
“The court finds no reason to interfere. The plea that such provision (Section 498A IPC) is violative of Article 14 of Constitution is wholly misconceived and misdirected. Article 15 explicitly empowers to enact a special law for protection of women, etc. This (misuse) needs to be examined on case-to-case basis,” Bar and Bench quoted the bench as saying.
Rejecting the plea, the judges emphasized that the issue of misuse should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis rather than making broad generalizations.
The petition was filed by Janshruti, a non-profit organization, which contended that legal safeguards against false complaints under Section 498A should be introduced. The counsel for the petitioner argued that, unlike in India where only women can seek legal recourse in domestic violence cases, many other countries allow any gender to file complaints in such matters.
In response, the Supreme Court reiterated India’s sovereignty, stating that while it acknowledges the possibility of misuse, every law can be misused, and it is the responsibility of courts to examine each case individually.
“There are cases of misuse of every law. Do you want us to make sweeping statements? There may be instances where the women have been victimised. There might be cases where the provision would have been misused. So it is the duty of the court to decide each case based on its peculiar facts,” the bench remarked.
The judgment comes after Section 498A was replaced by Section 85 in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, underscoring the ongoing legal debates surrounding the provision and its implementation.
The court dismissed a petition seeking a preliminary police investigation before filing a First Information Report (FIR) under the anti-dowry law, citing concerns over its alleged misuse in matrimonial disputes.
A bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh found no merit in the petition, which argued that Section 498A violated Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. The court clarified that Article 15 of the Constitution specifically empowers the enactment of special laws for the protection of women.
“The court finds no reason to interfere. The plea that such provision (Section 498A IPC) is violative of Article 14 of Constitution is wholly misconceived and misdirected. Article 15 explicitly empowers to enact a special law for protection of women, etc. This (misuse) needs to be examined on case-to-case basis,” Bar and Bench quoted the bench as saying.
Rejecting the plea, the judges emphasized that the issue of misuse should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis rather than making broad generalizations.
The petition was filed by Janshruti, a non-profit organization, which contended that legal safeguards against false complaints under Section 498A should be introduced. The counsel for the petitioner argued that, unlike in India where only women can seek legal recourse in domestic violence cases, many other countries allow any gender to file complaints in such matters.
In response, the Supreme Court reiterated India’s sovereignty, stating that while it acknowledges the possibility of misuse, every law can be misused, and it is the responsibility of courts to examine each case individually.
“There are cases of misuse of every law. Do you want us to make sweeping statements? There may be instances where the women have been victimised. There might be cases where the provision would have been misused. So it is the duty of the court to decide each case based on its peculiar facts,” the bench remarked.
The judgment comes after Section 498A was replaced by Section 85 in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, underscoring the ongoing legal debates surrounding the provision and its implementation.
Comments (0)
Leave a Comment