Anti-dowry law being misused: Delhi high court

The verdict was delivered on the same day when Supreme Court asked courts to be on guard against misuse of domestic violence law

The Delhi high court has expressed concern about cases of women harassing their husbands and in-laws by misusing the anti-dowry law — referring to Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which was replaced by Section 86 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) on July 1, 2024.

Anti-dowry law being misused: Delhi high court(HT_PRINT)

A bench of justice Amit Mahajan made the remarks while quashing a case registered by a wife against her husband under Section 498A in 2017, alleging harassment on the grounds of dowry demand and failure to return her “stri dhan”.

“Courts have taken note of the increasing tendency of implicating the husband and his family in matrimonial litigation in a number of cases. While the provision of Section 498A of IPC was introduced to combat harassment meted out to married woman, it is abysmal to note that the same is now also being misused as a tool to harass the husband and his family members and gain a leverage,” justice Mahajan observed in February 7 ruling, released on Thursday.

In his 14-page ruling, justice Mahajan also condemned the filing of such cases “in the heat of the moment by exaggerating actual events”. “Such matters are now filed in the heat of the moment on advice of counsel by exaggerating and misconstruing actual events,” the court said.

The verdict was delivered on the same day when the Supreme Court asked courts to be on guard against misuse of the domestic violence law flagging its concern over the tendency of dragging family members to face prosecution on generalised allegations without there being any specific allegation or material to allege their role in perpetrating the violence. In December last year, the Supreme Court had strongly criticised the law’s misuse, noting that it is increasingly being exploited to settle “personal vendettas” or exert undue pressure on husbands and their families.

The man’s petition argued by advocate Sanchar Anand before the high court said that his wife had falsely implicated him in the case to hide her adulterous conduct and the allegations were vague as well as general in nature. It said that the two had separated in 2014 after he found photos of his wife with another person and the city court in 2019 had granted him divorce on the grounds of cruelty after his wife withdrew her consent for divorce by mutual consent.

The woman, represented by advocate Anurag Sharma, submitted that mere grant of divorce had no effect on the merits of the case and she had made “categorical” allegations in the first information report against her husband.

Consequently, the court quashed the FIR taking note of the fact that the couple started living separately from 2014, and the woman filed the FIR years after she had filed for divorce on the grounds of cruelty. The FIR, the judge said, contained sweeping and omnibus allegations without specifying the date or time of the alleged instances, and the continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of law.

“In the current case as well, sweeping and omnibus allegations have been levelled against the petitioner. No date or time or particulars of the alleged instances of demand for dowry or harassment have been specified in the FIR. However, in matters such as this, where vague allegations have been made against the petitioner, that too belatedly, in the opinion of this court, continuation of proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law,” the court said.