Section 498A of IPC envisages legal recourse to a married woman against her Husband or relative of her husband for subjecting her to cruelty. It states as follows:
“498 A. 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 purposes of this section, “cruelty means”—
(a) 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
(b) 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.”
Although, the said provision was enacted with a view to safeguard the interests of women suffering from cruelty at the hands of her husband and relatives of the husband, however, with the passage of time, the said provision is rampantly misutilised by vengeful and maletic wife and daughter-in-law, who often invoke the said provision against the relatives of the husband, especially the immediate in-laws, to harass and put pressure on the husband under the ulterior motives to make him/ them succumb to illegal and unjust demands.
In this context, recently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed a landmark judgment in the matter being titled as “Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. Vs. State of Bihar & Ors.”, Criminal Appeal No. 195 of 2022, decided on 08.02.2022.
The Hon’ble Court dealt with an important issue as to “whether allegations made against the in-laws of a Woman under Section 498A of IPC which are in the nature of general omnibus allegations can be quashed?”
The Hon’ble Court in its judgment observed that:
“12 …incorporation of Section 498A of IPC was aimed at preventing cruelty committed upon a woman by her husband and her in-laws, by facilitating rapid state intervention. However, it is equally true, that in recent times, matrimonial litigation in the country has also increased significantly and there is a greater disaffection and friction surrounding the institution of marriage, now, more than ever. This has resulted in an increased tendency to employ provisions such as 498A IPC as instruments to settle personal scores against the husband and his relatives.”.
The Hon’ble Court while citing its previous judgments namely, Rajesh Sharma and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr., (2018) 10 SCC 472, Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Anr., (2014) 8 SCC 273, Preeti Gupta & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr., (2014) 8 SCC 273, Geeta Mehrotra & Anr. Vs. State of UP & Anr., (2012) 10 SCC 741 and K. Subba Rao v. State of Telangana, (2018) 14 SCC 452 held that:
“18. The above-mentioned decisions clearly demonstrate that this court has at numerous instances expressed concern over the misuse of section 498A IPC and the increased tendency of implicating relatives of the husband in matrimonial disputes, without analysing the long term ramifications of a trial on the complainant as well as the accused. It is further manifest from the said judgments that false implication by way of general omnibus allegations made in the course of matrimonial dispute, if left unchecked would result in misuse of the process of law. Therefore, this court by way of its judgments has warned the courts from proceeding against the relatives and in-laws of the husband when no prima facie case is made out against them.”
“22. …in the absence of any specific role attributed to the accused Appellants, it would be unjust if the Appellants are forced to go through the tribulations of a trial, i.e., general and omnibus allegations cannot manifest in a situation where the relatives of the complainant’s husband are forced to undergo trial. It has been highlighted by this court in varied instances, that a criminal trial leading to an eventual acquittal also inflicts severe scars upon the accused, and such an exercise must therefore be discouraged.”
The said judgment is a step ahead in scuttling out vexatious criminal cases initiated at the behest of malovent woman against innocent relatives who are not a party to the inter-se dispute between husband and wife and are unnecessarily being dragged in the controversy for no fault of theirs.
