GUWAHATI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday expressed concerns over the increasing misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which penalises cruelty by husbands and their families against married women. A Bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice N Kotiswar Singh noted that the provision, originally intended to protect women from domestic violence, is being exploited by some women for personal vendettas.
ALSO READ: Train Services To And From Assam Disrupted As Protesters Block Tracks At Jorai Station
"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," the Court observed, highlighting a worrying trend of misuse.
These remarks were made while quashing cases of cruelty and dowry harassment filed by a wife against her husband and in-laws in Dara Lakshmi Narayana and Others v. State of Telangana and Another. The wife had lodged the complaints after her husband sought the dissolution of their marriage.
The Bench underscored the importance of judicial scrutiny in cases involving vague or generalised allegations during matrimonial disputes. "In recent years, as matrimonial conflicts have increased across the country, provisions like Section 498A are being used as tools for personal vendetta," the judgement noted. The Court warned that unchecked misuse of such laws could encourage the use of legal processes for coercive tactics.
The apex court clarified that its observations were not intended to discourage genuine victims of cruelty from seeking justice. "We are not, for a moment, stating that any woman who has suffered cruelty should refrain from making a complaint. However, cases such as the present one, where a complaint is filed as a counterblast to a petition for dissolution of marriage, must be discouraged," it said.
The Supreme Court has previously raised similar concerns about Section 498A being among the most misused legal provisions. Advocates Shubham Kumar and others represented the appellants, while Advocates Devina Sehgal and S Uday Bhanu appeared for the respondents.
This ruling highlights the Court’s endeavour to balance the protection of genuine victims with the need to prevent misuse of legal safeguards.
