A call for provisions which are female biased is certainly essential to deal with issues of domestic violence, dowry deaths, female foeticide and cruelty etc. These problems have been present in the society since times immemorial. But as the condition of women is improving, there has been a growing misuse of such legislations. This article focuses on the imbalance such laws create and the consequences of their misuse. It introduces the readers with a new dynamic world where the need for gender-neutral laws is a requisite. It tackles the issue by pinpointing areas needing improvement and proposing plausible solutions.
The Contemporary Relevance
The tragic incident in Bengaluru involving Atul Subhash has sparked significant public outrage, raising critical questions about the legal system and its female-centric laws, which often portray men as perpetrators. This is not the first incident of such kind; it has gained widespread attention primarily because the victim ended his life leaving a suicide note naming Nikita Singhania, in response to the alleged torture[1]. It is yet an issue how the legal system deals with this imbalance. This raises a critical question of whether men are really safe in the patriarchal society with female-centric laws?
There have been numerous cases highlighting the misuse of Sections 498A (Section 84 BNS) and 304B (Section 80 BNS)[2] . Both of these provisions deal with the issue of cruelty and these provisions were initially introduced to address issues like domestic violence and dowry demands. In past decades women have been subjected to violence and abuse and so the need for such biased laws was evident from the kind of instances taking place, but with the changing time where the condition has improved significantly their approach needs to be revisited.
Legal Provisions
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act was enacted in 2005[3]. Before 1983, violence against women was addressed using general provisions such as assault and grievous hurt the rising numbers of burning brides and dowry deaths called for a separate provision[4]. Also, the Dowry Prohibition Act and sections 498A combined with 304B of IPC were created to deal with the menace of domestic abuse of women and dowry deaths.
The Supreme Court has repeatedly expressed concerns that the law against cruelty, intended to shield suffering women, is sometimes used as a weapon by women to harass their husbands[5]. Such incidents call for more gender-neutral laws. From such instances it is clear that there is a need for judicial prudence to identify the cases of over-exaggeration and false accusation.
The laws were established to protect women from dowry demands and domestic abuse; however, their misuse has undermined their original intent. Additionally, men often suffer damage to their societal reputation and face stigmatization as a result. This often results in mental abuse and economic strains.
The Supreme Court of India has recently condemned the use of welfare laws including rape, cruelty, stating that these weren’t meant to threaten, chastise or extort money from their husbands and such instances are nothing but misuse of welfare laws. Because of the misuse of section 498A for breaking-up families, punish in-laws and extort money from their husbands has sparked tremendous controversies, the Supreme Court has defined it as ‘legal terrorism’ undermining the seriousness of genuine cases[6] . This blog examines the misuse of certain laws, identifies the root causes of these issues, and offers actionable insights. This is not only a threat to the relations between men and women but could also result in backlash. Such reverberations may critically the condition of women in society. Would this be the goal Article 14 of the Constitution of India aims to achieve?
It is essential to adopt a more gender-neutral approach. With the recent decriminalization of the third-gender, it remains to be seen how these gender-specific laws will address the challenges emerging in a society that is becoming increasingly inclusive of diverse sexual orientations.
The Enigma Of Extreme Feminism
At its core, feminism seeks to establish a society where gender equality is the norm. While this goal has yet to be fully achieved, there are areas where feminism has reached extreme levels. True feminism does not aim to overpower men but advocates for equal respect for both men and women in society[7] . Due to historical injustices faced by women, society and the legal system has developed a bias towards women, believing it necessary for reform. However, there must be reasonable limits, much like the restrictions on fundamental rights. Misuse of these provisions can lead to serious repercussions. As extremes of any kind are detrimental, society needs to revisit the enigma of extreme feminism.
The Need For A Balanced Approach
Despite the gender-specific nature of these legislations, the Supreme Court has intervened to ensure that their application remains balanced. In *Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar[8]* , the Apex Court issued guidelines mandating that arrests should only be made after thorough investigation. Similarly, in *Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India[9]*, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for meticulous scrutiny by authorities to prevent the misuse of female-welfare laws.
Beyond judicial intervention, it is crucial to promote awareness about the proper use of these laws and to ensure careful implementation. Legal reforms and the introduction of strict measures, such as penalties for misuse, could also help address this issue effectively.
Conclusion
The authorities should thoroughly verify such complaints before proceeding with arrests. The legislature could introduce strict provisions to address the misuse of these laws by women, and it is essential that authorities remain impartial and unbiased in their enforcement. While this may be a challenging task for the authorities, a critical assessment aimed at achieving a gender-neutral approach is essential in today’s context.
While these measures may lay the groundwork, achieving true gender justice requires more than just legislative action and judicial interventions. As a society, we must raise awareness and understand our responsibilities as citizens. It is crucial to promote balanced measures and avoid extremes from either side, as they could lead to unintended consequences and setbacks.
To create a more equitable society, we need to foster a culture of respect and understanding, ensuring that laws are applied fairly and justly, and that all individuals, regardless of gender, are protected and treated with dignity. The misuse of any of these provisions would undermine their intended purpose. By working together, we can build a foundation for genuine gender justice.
Considering the misuse of section 498A, it should be made bailable and compoundable as suggested in the Mali math Committee Report[10]. While the section 498A of IPC is inclusive of both male and female relatives of husband, the provisions are mostly gender-specific. moreover, authorities, including the police, must ensure that a thorough investigation is conducted before making any arrests, and the judiciary must hear both sides impartially and without any bias. The Legislature also needs to address women to women and women to men abuse more comprehensively.
[1] Singhania, N. (2025, March 24). Bengaluru techie Atul Subhash suicide case: “If I harassed him for money, what Nikita Singhania told police”. LiveMint. https://www.livemint.com/news/india/bengaluru-techie-atul-subhash-suicide-case-if-i-harassed-him-for-money-what-nikita-singhania-told-police-11734329001623.html
[2] Lawyers Club India. (n.d.). Shield turned weapon: Decoding misuse of Sec 498A IPC. Retrieved February 27, 2025, from https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/shield-turned-weapon-decoding-misuse-of-sec-498a-ipc-16651.asp
[3] Lawful Legal. (n.d.). Reform in domestic violence and dowry laws in light of Atul Subhash case. Retrieved February 27, 2025, from https://lawfullegal.in/reform-in-domestic-violence-and-dowry-laws-in-light-of-atul-subhash-case/
[4] Raizada Associates. (n.d.). Dowry Prohibition Act. Retrieved February 27, 2025, from https://www.raizadaassociates.com/blog/dowry-prohibition-act/
[5] Indian Express. (2025, February 27). Supreme Court criticises misuse of IPC Section 498A by husbands’ kin. Indian Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/supreme-court-criticises-misuse-ipc-section-498a-husbands-kin-9719169/
[6] Bharat Law. (n.d.). Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code: An analysis of its impact, misuse, and the way forward. Retrieved February 27, 2025, from https://www.bharatlaw.ai/post/section-498a-of-the-indian-penal-code-an-analysis-of-its-impact-misuse-and-the-way-forward
[7] Radfemfatale. (n.d.). Feminism is not about gender equality. Medium. Retrieved February 27, 2025, from https://medium.com/@radfemfatale/feminism-is-not-about-gender-equality-efc2ccb1e46b
[8] Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar (2014) AIR SC 2796
[9]Shyam Lal v State of UP (2005) AIR SC 3100
[9]
[10] 498a.org. (n.d.). Malimath Committee: Selected Sections. Retrieved February 27, 2025, from https://498a.org/contents/general/Malimath%20Committee_SelectedSections.pdf
Author: Moyesha Sharma, 2nd year Law Student at Institute of Law, Nirma University
