The Ugly Facet of Section 498A, Indian Penal Code

Introduction:

From the time immemorial, marriage in India has been considered a religious sacrament than a mere ritual or responsibility. However, the history portrays a delusive depiction due to the maltreatment which was predetermined for women as social evils like Sati, Child Marriage, Dowry was practiced at large in almost every part of the country. But with time, legislations were drafted in order to curb such evil and degrading practices. Keeping aside others, the first attempt to prohibit dowry practice was made in 1961 by enacting Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. However, the incidents of this archaic belief kept on increasing along with the domestic atrocities. Keeping this fact in view to combat the hazard of dowry and cruelty towards women, section 498A was introduced in the year 1983 in Indian Penal Code[1] with an intent to protect married women from being subjected to matrimonial cruelty. It claims to provide protection to women against dowry-related atrocities and cruelty.

On the other hand, by recognizing the prejudiced nature of sec. 498A, it became an easy tool for women to misuse it and wreak revenge from their husbands or to file a false case as with the passage of time the law which was supposed to shield, became a weapon for women to harass their husbands or in-laws as the law itself is of biased and bigoted nature as it is a cognizable offence that empowers the police to arrest without warrant and even if the convict is proven innocent in the court of law, still it results in the infringement of reputation, goodwill, social respect, etc. It is due to this reason, section 498A is one of the most controversial sections of IPC as considering upon its extent of misuse, only 15% is the rate of conviction under sec. 498A whereas the rate of charge-sheeting under sec. 498A is 93.6%.[2]

Section 498A, IPC in Brief

Section 498A is the only section in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 that recognises domestic violence against women as an offence. While inserting sec. 498A in IPC, a subsequent amendment was made in the Criminal Procedural Code, 1973 and Indian Evidence Act, 1972. Essentials of sec. 498A is;

1. A woman must be married
2. Must be subjected to cruelty or harassment
3. Such act of harassment or cruelty must be perpetuated by the husband of the woman or by any relative of the husband.

It prescribes punishment for 3 years and a fine. Also the definition of sec. 498A includes “cruelty” which can be defined as:

1. If the act done is of such nature that the woman is enticed to commit suicide or cause of any fatal injury, either mentally or physically. The evidence is required to prove cruelty as decided in Shobha Rani v. Medhukar Reddy[3].
2. Harassment of women or her any relative regarding an unlawful demand.

Constitutional Validity of Section 498-A

Being a controversial provision of law, sec. 498A has always been an interesting topic for debates and deliberations. Perhaps, it must be concentrated upon that the same provision of the law violates some basic principles of equality and non-discrimination embodied in the Constitution, such as;

1. Article 14 – while intending to protect the life of a person, Section 498A of IPC jeopardizes the life of many innocent persons. The equality clause enshrined in article 14 is of wide import. It guarantees equality before the law or equal protection under the law.[4] Hence, the provision is discriminatory and in violation of article 14 of the Constitution of India.
2. Article 21 – instead of restoring equilibrium, the provision aggravates disequilibria as it infringes the right to reputation under the ambit of article 21. Hence, there is a failure of guarantee of the right to life under article 21 of the Constitution as it was also recognised and recommended by The Malimath Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice System, 2003.
3. In Inder Raj Malik and others v. Mrs Sumita Malik[5], it was contended that section 498A is ultra vires Article 14 and 20 (2) of the constitution. It was objected that already a pre-existent law; The Prohibition of Dowry Act, 1961 deals with such similar type of cases. Thus both the statutes together raises a situation of ‘Double-Jeopardy.

Judicial Perspective on Rampant Misuse of Sec. 498-A

No matter how bonafide intentions of the legislators may have been while inserting sec. 498A in IPC, but the law has failed to put cessation on the filing of false cases by women and which also amounts to wastage of court’s time and contempt of court. Keeping this fact in consideration, the Supreme Court of India has deliberated on the frivolous misuse of sec. 498A by women in following matters;

1. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [6]

The court that due to the cognizable nature of the offence as prescribed in the section, it is more often used as a medium of harassing the husband and his relatives by getting them arrested without a prima facie case. Thus, the court laid down certain guidelines for police to abide by and said even the Magistrate must be careful enough not to authorise detention casually.

2. Manju Ram Kalita v. State of Assam[7]

The wife alleged that she has been subjected to mental as well as physical cruelty and accused the husband under sec. 498A. The court held that ‘Cruelty’ must be established in the context of sec. 498A as to invoke it as it may differ from other statutory provisions. Further, the court said “Petty quarrels cannot be termed as ‘cruelty’ to attract the provisions of sec. 498A, IPC”.

3. Rajesh Kumar & Ors v. Sate of U.P.[8]

This became a landmark judgement as the Supreme Court laid down comprehensive directions to prevent the misuse of the provisions of sec. 498A. The court directed the following;

1. The constitution of one or more family welfare committees in every district consisting of three-members which is to be constituted by Dist. Legal Service Authorities. The work of the committee will be scrutinizing every single complaint filed under sec. 498A received by police or magistrate.
2. Investing Officer to be designated within a month from the delivery of the verdict to investigate the basis of the complaint and other interrelated offences.
3. In dealing with bail matters, certain things such as individual roles, prima facie evidence or truth of the allegations, a further need for detention/custody must be carefully considered in the interest of justice.

However, the court said these directions will not be applicable in matters involving tangible physical injuries or deaths.

Justice Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, delivering the judgment on behalf of the Hon’ble Supreme Court took note of the gross misuse of sec. 498A observing “The fact that s.498-A is a cognizable & non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shields by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband & his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bed-ridden grand-fathers & grand-mothers of husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested”[9].

243^rd Law Commission’s View on Sec. 498-A, IPC

Before the 243^rd Law Commission, 154^th and 237^th had also suggested making the offence under section 498A compoundable. Which means that the offence would have been bailable and non-cognizable. But after weighing deliberation and discussion, the commission was not in favour of making the offence compoundable. The reason cited by the report was the that the primary objective of insertion of 498A in Indian Penal Code, 1860 was to overcome the plight of marital cruelty arising due to non-fulfilment of dowry demands, and no amount of misuse could justify a reassessment of such practices.

However, the law commission pointed out the procedure opted in regard to sec. 498A, and stated that “the attitude of arrest first and then proceed with the rest is despicable”.

Conclusion

From the above dissertation, it can be concluded that to prevent the bogus application of the sec. 498A, IPC, the law as well as law enforcing agencies must adhere to the procedure laid down in section 41 and 41A of Cr.P.C. which directs the police to proceed with arrest, unwarranted, only if pre-requisite conditions stated in the sections are met fully because amending the whole law on dowry will not suffice the good, as evidenced by the 243^rd Law Commission Report.

---

References:

[1] Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983

[2] National Crime Record Bureau; Statistic Report, (2012).

[3] 1988 AIR 121

[4] P.M. Bakshi, The Constitution of India, (Universal Law Publishing Co., New Delhi, 15^th Ed., 2018)

[5] 1986 Cri L.J 1510 (Del.)

[6] Cri. App. No. 1277  OF 2014, 2^nd July 2014

[7] (2009) 13 SCC 330

[8] 2017 (SCC Online) SC 821

[9] Godara, Karan., “Misuse of section 498A IPC – Judicial Trend”, Indian Journal of Research, Vol. 4 Issue 9, 2015