Misuse 498a dowry domestic violence gender equality india

Pariwarik Suraksha (Regd.) Ph. 9312800559

Home \| Aims \| News \| Legal Help \| Campaigns \| Support Us \| Contact Us

Introduction:498A-Mental Cruelty/Harassment by husband or relatives

Most of the domestic violence complaints are made by newly married women, who are harassed by their husbands or their husbands' relatives for dowry. Due to the increase in the number of dowry deaths, the Parliament amended the IPC and introduced Section 498 A.

Under Section 498 (A) if a woman's husband or his relatives;

drive her to commit suicide;
drive her to injure herself;
drive her to cause danger to her life, limb or health (mental or physical);
harass her/her relatives to give him/them property or valuable security or
harass her stating that she/her relatives did not give him/them property or valuable security

then such person/s would be would be liable for punishment of upto 3 years and would also be liable to pay a fine.

Where a married woman commits suicide within 7 years of her married life and it is shown that her husband or his relatives had treated her with cruelty, it would be presumed by the Court that her husband or relatives had aided (abetted) her suicide (Section 113 A of the Indian Evidence Act).

Under this provision, the following would amount to cruelty:

drinking and coming home late coupled with beating and demand of dowry (P.B.Biksdapathi v State of A.P, 1992 Cr.LJ 1186; 1989 Cr.LJ 1186 A.P);
filing false and defamatory proceedings against the wife and humiliating her with search warrants and seizing her personal property (Madhuri Mukund Chitnis v M.M.Chitnis 1992 Cri LJ 111 Bom);
maltreating wife for dowry and sending her back to her father's house resulting in illness due to shock and after effects of cruelty (Vijai Ratan Sharma v State of U.P, 1988 Cr.LJ 1581 All);
cruelty and harassment of a mistress (Vamgarala Yedukondala v State of A.P, 1988 Cr.LJ 1538 A.P);
baseless allegations of adultery, infidelity or unchastity of wife (Rishi Kumar v State of Haryana 1988 1 Cri LC (P&H) 378);
baseless allegation that wife was carrying illegitimate child (Gurubachan Singh v Satpal Singh AIR 1990 SC 209)
accusing wife of being barren (Renu v State of Haryana 1990 (3) Crimes 226);
scolding the wife leading her to commit suicide (Anjanabai v State of Maharashtra, 1988 Mh LJ 641);
repeated demands for dowry articles and money from newly married wife and parents and consequent harassment (Wazir Chand v State of Haryana AIR 1989 SC 378);
taking away child to harass wife for dowry (Vijay Kumar Sharma v State of Uttar Pradesh 1991 (1) Crimes (All) 298);

However there are exceptions. The following acts are not considered cruelty under this provision:

willfully taking liquor and coming home late despite wife's protests (Jagdish Chander v State of Haryana 1988 Cri LJ 1048);
domestic quarrels between husband and wife (Yashoda Bai v Krishnamoorthy Bhimappa Katavkar, AIR 1992 Karnataka 368);
requiring wife to do domestic work in the absence of servants (Shyama Devi v State of West Bengal 1987 Cri LJ 1163);
insisting that the wife stay with her in-laws (Mange Ram and others v State of Haryana 1988 (1) Cri.LC 678);
reprimanding wife (Balbir Singh v State of Punjab 1987 (1) Crimes);
abusing and beating wife in lower class society (Veerulu v State of A.P 1988 (3) Crimes 549);
single isolated act of physical violence (Peddy Satyanarayan v State of A.P (1992) CCR 78);

Mental Cruelty Cruelty under Section 498 A includes mental cruelty. A series of acts and not one single act of cruelty should be proved to establish mental cruelty. Mental cruelty may be of any kind and of different types. It may be subtle or brutal. It may be by words, gestures or by mere silence. The Courts may give new dimensions to mental cruelty by judicial interpretations (Supreme Court in Wazir Chand v State of Haryana AIR 1989 SC 378).

Presumption of harassment under the Evidence Act

Other than the general provisions for punishment of hurt and physical abuse under the Code and the special provision under Section 498 A, the Indian Evidence Act also contains a beneficial provision. Under Section 113 A of the Evidence Act, if a married woman commits suicide within 7 years, it would be presumed that her husband or his relatives had harassed her. In such circumstances if a case is filed against the husband and/or relatives for harassment, harassment need not be proved. On the other hand the husband and/or relatives would have to prove that they did not harass the married woman.

If the husband and/or relatives are unable to prove that they did not harass the woman, he/they would be liable for imprisonment of upto 10 years and would also be liable to pay fine.

*The Indian Penal Code was amended in the year 1983 (Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983)) and Section 498 (A) was introduced