Misuse of Section 498A has to end. Supreme Court directive will hopefully do the needful
The Supreme Court has done well to direct the authorities to not arrest people or apply coercive means over complaints of dowry harassment without first conducting a preliminary inquiry. The directive has come in the wake of many complaints that the police are quick to arrest the husband or the in-laws over dowry-related first information reports without conducting a basic probe into the allegation. The application of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code has no doubt been misused in multiple cases across the country. The National Crime Records Bureau figures for 2013 reveal that, of the more than 4.6 lakh cases registered under the Section, more than 46,000 in all ended in acquittals or were withdrawn. Just over 7,000 cases led to convictions. It can be argued that the low conviction rate can be due to multiple factors, including the failure of investigating authorities to do their task efficiently. This can be the reason in certain cases, but not all. A stringent law had been put in place with the noblest of intention: To ensure that the culprits in dowry harassment cases do not use loopholes in the law to escape punishment. But the law has been used in the extreme by the authorities, and this has often resulted in the entire in-law family of the complainant — beside the husband — being locked up in prison. There have been instances where even children have been hauled up as accused in such cases. They are in effect treated as guilty unless proven innocent. There have been instances — and not a few to be brushed aside as aberrations — where the wife, for ulterior reasons, framed her in-laws or the husband on dowry issues to settle domestic scores. Besides, the extreme use of Section 498A often closes the doors on reconciliation between the warring parties. Thus, neither is the cause of justice served by the misuse of the Section nor is domestic harmony attained. All of this has led to the apex court to say that many dowry-related complaints are not bona fide in nature. Back in 2014 too, the court had asked the police to be careful in invoking Section 498A. If the authorities find that the allegations have merit, they must fully apply the law.
The Supreme Court's shift in the legal perspective is interesting. The earlier belief was that a woman would not come out in the open against her husband or in-laws on any matter, least of all dowry because it would then drag her own parents into the issue, unless she was genuinely harassed and unable finally to bear the torture — physical or psychological or both. The traditional image of Indian women suffering silently, rather than bringing disrepute to her in-laws by washing dirty linen in public, perhaps was the reason why her word got to be considered with credibility. However, with the rising instances of cooked-up complaints, it became necessary to have a re-look. Following the apex court's directive, States must move quickly to set up panels that the court has asked for, which will look into the merits of dowry harassment complaints before Section 498A is slapped. It must be kept in mind that the new directives do not apply to cases where alleged dowry-related death has occurred.