In India where rituals and customs are deeply rooted in the society, Domestic violence is one of the most adored and aged-old crimes of the culture. Though the cultural festivity had been enjoyed to the maximum, a realization came that dowry harassment and cruelty towards married women is a serious problem. To combat this, Section 498A was incorporated in the Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961, the latter being set apart from the other provisions of the Act and primarily dealing with the mistreatment meted out by the husband and in-laws of the affected female.

First, the section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was just intended as a shield to women so that they should not be abused or maltreated. Thus, it was a light in the dark for many women facing the evil of dowry in those years. Though it may originally have been a shield against attacks, over time it has also evolved into a weapon that is too often used as a tool in the wrong hand.

Unflinchingly, 498A of today's Indian society is one of the heinous form of the misuse of the law. Instead of fulfilling its essential aim which is sending the offenders behind bars, the law provision in question is used nowadays by some women for their own profit and inner satisfaction which results in the lawless harassment and tormenting of imen. These abuses not only ridicule legal institutions instead they make status of an individual worse and develop an environment of distrust.

In this blog, we explore the complicated impediments to the correct use of Section 498A, introducing to its, consequences, and urgency of reform. Through our visually impactful content, we seek to raise questions, encourage constructive contemplation, and generate a conversation to figure out together ways to rectify a system that may be angelically viewed from the outside but is unjust to others within it.

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code

498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.

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.

Explanation. - For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" 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.

It's clear from the provisions of Section 498-A that certain key elements must be fulfilled to constitute an offense:

• The marriage is a must for the lady in question.
• She must have passed through torture or abuse.
• The cruelty or mistreatment must have been accomplished either by her husband or relatives of her husband.

The term 'cruelty' encompasses various acts, including:

1. Any purposeful action which a person could make them think about committing suicide or seriously injure/mutilate/harm themselves/her life/women's health.
2. Actions, which lead to mental or physical health problems of women.
3. A woman's harassment, committed in order to get hold of someone's property or assets not belonging to the person threatened.

Constitutional Validity of Section 498-A

The plaintiffs in this case were Inder Raj Malik and others v/s Sumita Malik, is an important case as regards the interpretation and application of Section 498A with Article 14 and Article 20(2) of the Constitution. It was argued that the existence of both the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 498-An enable the circumstance, sometimes called "double jeopardy." Delhi High Court, however rejected the point and explained that Section 498-A does not provide such a situation.

The court emphasized that the two provisions are differentiated by the fact that, even though the demand for dowry amounts to the offense in question in Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Section 498-A punishes a more grave manifestation of the offense. Section 498A, as it is framed, deals with the torts of maltreatment caused to wife or her families holding along with the demands of property or any valuable security. Hence, the offences which fall under Both Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 498-A of IPC are separately punishable, as they deal with different aspects of dowry-related offenses.

Misuse of 498A

NCRB for the year 2012 sends a wave of shock with the enormous amounts of arrests undertaken under Section 498-A of the IPC. Altogether 197,762 persons faced arrest across India owing to these acts offences, which showed an increment of 9.4 percentage points over the preceding year. Strikingly, the female population among these arrests is about 25% which amounts to 47,951.

The capture of both mothers and sisters of the husbands is evidence that women who are in the spousal network were targeted. Men, obviously, accounted for 6% of arrests under crimes committed under IPC and represented 4.5% of total crimes which is only second to theft and hurt. Although, the top prosecutions under Section 498-A of IPC remain very high at 93.6%, the conviction rate after trial comes down to 15% only.

This the lowest conviction rate across all the other categories. Besides that, the 3,87,506 which are leading to trial and are most likely to end into acquittals, 3,17,728 at the moment. Such figures again show us how essential is the investigation of circumstances under which this provision is put into practice and is later interpreted, so as to ensure justice is served as well as fairness.

Yet, the most discouraging part is that some women have made this section into their weapon to persecute their husbands and relatives which for short period bring immense suffering to underprivileged elderly, often elderly couples which turns out to be the victim of their sins. Although we live in this modern era, even with the education and awareness, the age-old prejudice that Section 498-A is just an anti-males campaign seems to be prevailing.

In 2013, the Malimath Committee report also mentioned the issue of misuse of Section 498-A and talked about the expression "general complaint" in this section as a major type of misuse of this section. By describing this instance, the role of justice reform in improving the criminal justice system is brought to the fore because, this way, such misuse or injustice can be prevented. In the case of Sushil Kumar Sharma v. UOI, it was observed that Section 498A of the IPC can be misused greatly, even in such a way as to be termed as 'legal terrorism.'

Judicial Reforms which tried to curb the misuse of 498A:

1. Guidelines from Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar:
   • Police officers have been advised not to take the defendants into custody immediately after the complaint under Section 498-A IPC is filed.
   • Arrests should not be done unnecessarily, only when necessary, and what constitutes the ground for the arrest will be as stated in Section 41, CrPC.
   • Police require officers to complete a formal checklist, indicate reasons and tend the discovery of evidence for the arrest.
   • Magistrates can order the detainment of persons after reviewing police reports and ensuring that it conforms to police regulations.
   • The court may take disciplinary actions against officers and magistrates if they fail to obey the orders.
      
2. Guidelines from Rajesh Sharma v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Amended in Manav Adhikar v. Union of India Social Action Forum):
   • As specified in Section 498-A IPC, the complaints need to be assessed by the designated area inspector.
   • Parties may reach an agreement to discontinue the case by filing a petition before the High Court for quashing proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC.
   • The immediate hearing of bail applications should be possible as well as the recovery of the disputed dowry items should not be conditions which may lead to bail denial if all the other rights of women and minor children can be protected.
   • Impounding passports or issuing Red Notices should not be ordinary for Indian citizens unless in the case of grievous hurt or death in reality.

What are the reasons for people wrongly escalating 498A Indian Penal code 1860?

Several factors are to be blamed for the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. First of all, it serves as a tool of legal extortion, where some people see it as a corrupt quick route to make money by extorting huge sums from others.

Secondly, in situations where the wife previously had a relationship and cannot get rid of it, she could marry only to appease her parents and later on exploit section 498A to get a divorce. As a matter of fact, women engaged with extramarital affairs may treat Section 498A as a tool for negotiation.

Besides that, other women can be mightily set upon gaining power on their husbands through demanding that they cut off all family bonds and relationships and being very strict on money and social conduct. However, denying access to children may also be a basis, like cases of sham marriage where information such as occupation level or medical history is hidden only to face 498A offence when asked.

Recovery in the case of the false accusations.

1. Defamation Lawsuit (Section 500 IPC):
   • The husband can file a claim for defamation against people who are making false allegations under Section 498A of the IPC.
   • The offence of defamation is encompassed by Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which offers specific legal remedies for such cases of defamation or malicious spread of rumour.
2. Claim for Recovery of Damages (Section 9 CPC):
   • Under section 9 of the CPC, the husband can file a written claim to be paid for the damages. This way the husband and his family can get compensation for the harm they received from the false accusations of the husband's cruelty and mistreatment.
3. Section 182 IPC for False Information:
   • Section 182 of the IPC is a preventive measure against 498A false cases. Under the Section 182 determination, if the authorities affirm the stories were fake, the one who claimed without evidence can be prosecuted. The judiciary might impose the sentence comprising imprisonment up to 6 months or a fine or both, in the case of giving false information.

Suggestions:

1. Speedy Trials:
   • Expedite the trial processes in cases of Section 498A to grant immediate relief to innocent victims.
      
2. Civil Authorities for Investigation:
   • Limit the investigation of 498A cases to be done by the civil authorities and the police action to only be taken on the basis of credible evidence.
      
3. Amendment of Section 498A:
   • Immediately change the section 498A IPC, 1860 to eliminate its loopholes.
      
4. Establishment of Family Counselling Organizations:
   • Create family counselling associations that provide help and professional tips to people with family conflicts.
      
5. Role of NGOs:
   • Advice the NGOs engaged in human rights campaigns to campaign against 'misuse' of criminal laws for petty matters.
      
6. Bailable Offence:
   • Ensure that cases under Section 498A are treated as bailable offences so that people without any guilt are not forced to arrest/compulsorily remain in custody.
      
7. Penalties for False Accusations:
   • Imposition of penalties and strict actions against people making false claims will discourage misuse of the law.
      
8. Accountability of Police Officers:
   • Impose harsh penalties on dishonest and corrupt police officers through suspension or dismissals for any gross violation.

Conclusion
Hence, it is clear that initially the Section498-A of the IPC, 1860, which was made to protect women from domestic violence, is now abused against husband or their family members. The misuse of this undermines public confidence in the system of justice and is, therefore, an element of injustice.

While real situations which require legal protection are of vital importance, the excessive use of this provision for the legal protection of cases of domestic violence can harm the rights and safety of innocent people, including men and women, as well as their families. Such a dire situation necessitates a legislative response to the problem to keep the eventuality of a 'legal terrorism' at bay.

Legislation should be focused on both the protection of the rights of women and taking into account the possible misuse of the legal arrangements. Through amending Section 498-A and enacting stern provisions to deter abuse, the judicial system can hence transform the system into a fair one, and justice for all can be achieved.

It is of considerable importance to act timely in order to prevent the misuse of legal provisions and to make sure that the real purpose of the law is not distorted by its misuse.

References:

1. Section 498 A, Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. Inder Raj Malik v. Sunita Malik, 1986 SCC OnLine Del 39
3. Crime in India-2016, National Crime Records Bureau, Government of India, http://ncrb.gov.in/StatPublications/CII/CII2016/pdfs/NEWPDFs.pdf.
4. Vasundhara, Use And Misuse of Section 498A, Legal Service India (May 12, 2019, 1:15 PM), http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-652-use-and-misuse-of-section-498a.html.
5. 2005 (6) SCC 266
6. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 469
7. 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1501
8. Section 500, Indian Penal Code, 1860.
9. Section 9, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
10. Section 182, Indian Penal Code, 1860.