SC quashes proceedings under Section 498A and requests the Legislature to consider making necessary changes to the corresponding Section in Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
While quashing a criminal case against the husband and in-laws by the wife under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in the Achin Gupta vs. State of Haryana & Anr. case, the Supreme Court (SC) of India on May 03, 2024, requested the Legislature to consider making necessary changes to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), the new IPC, containing provisions Section 85 and Section 86 similar to Section 498A of the IPC. The bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra also noted that the Legislature has yet to address the observations made by the top court almost 14 years ago in Preeti Gupta vs. the State of Jharkhand. The SC said it is necessary to relook entire Section 498A of the IPC. Therefore, the bench said, “We request the Legislature to look into the issue as highlighted above taking into consideration the pragmatic realities and consider making necessary changes in Sections 85 and 86 respectively of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, before both the new provisions come into force.”
In this case, the bench was hearing an appeal against the order of the Punjab & Haryana High Court refusing to quash the proceedings against the husband filed under Section 323, Section 406, Section 498A, and Section 506 of the IPC. The top court observed that “The plain reading of the FIR and the chargesheet papers indicate that the allegations leveled by the First Informant are quite vague, general and sweeping, specifying no instances of criminal conduct. It is also pertinent to note that in the FIR no specific date or time of the alleged offence/offences has been disclosed. Even the police thought fit to drop the proceedings against the other members of the Appellant’s family.” While hearing the matter, the bench noted, “If the Court is convinced by the fact that the involvement by the complainant of her husband and his close relatives is with an oblique motive then even if the FIR and the chargesheet disclose the commission of a cognizable offence the Court with a view to doing substantial justice should read in between the lines the oblique notice of the complainant and take a pragmatic view of the matter…” It added, “if the wife on account of matrimonial disputes decides to harass her husband and his family members then the first thing, she would ensure is to see that proper allegations are leveled in the First Information Report.”
After hearing the matter, the SC said “the Police machinery cannot be utilized for the purpose of holding the husband at ransom so that he could be squeezed by the wife at the instigation of her parents or relatives or friends. In all cases, where wife complains of harassment or ill-treatment, Section 498A of the IPC cannot be applied mechanically. No FIR is complete without Sections 506(2) and 323 of the IPC. Every matrimonial conduct, which may cause annoyance to the other, may not amount to cruelty. Mere trivial irritations, quarrels between spouses, which happen in day-to-day married life, may also not amount to cruelty.” Therefore, the SC quashed the criminal proceedings against the husband but before closing the matter, it said, “we would like to invite the attention of the Legislature to the observations made by this Court almost 14 years ago in Preeti Gupta case.” It added, “we looked into Sections 85 and 86 respectively of the BNS, which is to come into force with effect from 1st July 2024 so as to ascertain whether the Legislature has seriously looked into the suggestions of this Court as made in Preeti Gupta. Sections 85 and 86 respectively are reproduced herein below:
“Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.
85. 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 a fine.
Cruelty defined.
86. For the purposes of section 85, “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.”
Highlighting this, the bench said that Sections 85 and 86 are nothing but verbatim reproduction of Section 498A of the IPC. The only difference is that the Explanation to Section 498A of the IPC, is now by way of a separate provision, i.e., Section 86 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Following this, the bench requested the parliament to consider making necessary changes in Sections 85 and 86 of the BNS before both the new provisions come into force.
