A Curative Bench, led by Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur, has upheld a 2014 Supreme Court verdict that men cannot be “automatically” arrested on dowry harassment complaints filed by their wives.
The four-judge Bench found no fault with the verdict that the dowry harassment law had become a “menace”, more often used as “weapons rather than shields by disgruntled wives”. Justices Anil R. Dave, J.S. Khehar and P.C. Ghose were in the Bench.
Days before his retirement in 2014, Justice Chandramauli Kumar Prasad led a Bench that lamented that courts were filled with mothers-in-law, sisters-in-law and fathers-in-law and husbands facing prosecution under Section 498 A (dowry harassment) of the Indian Penal Code.
Dowry harassment is a cognisable and non-bailable offence. If guilty, a person faces up to three years' imprisonment and fine. Women’s rights groups were irked by the verdict, and the National Commission for Women sought a rare curative relief in the court.
In his verdict, Justice Prasad pointed to a “phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years” even as the “institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country”.
“The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bedridden grandfathers and grandmothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested,” the verdict observed.
Presenting government crime statistics to show that 1.97 lakh people were arrested in 2012 for dowry harassment, nearly a quarter of those being women, the verdict said: “This depicts that mothers and sisters of the husbands were liberally included in their arrest net.”
Lowest conviction rate
More statistics were shared to show Section 498A made up 4.5 per cent of the total crimes charged under different sections of the IPC — “more than any other crimes excepting theft and hurt”.
“The rate of charge-sheeting in cases under Section 498A of the IPC is as high as 93.6 per cent, while the conviction rate is only 15 percent, which is lowest across all heads. As many as 3,72,706 cases are pending trial of which on current estimate, nearly 3,17,000 are likely to result in acquittal,” the verdict observed.
Noting that “arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and cast scars forever”, the Supreme Court had directed the police not to arrest unnecessarily and Magistrates not to authorise detention casually and mechanically.
Highlighting that the “power of arrest is one of the lucrative sources of police corruption”, the court had warned police officers of contempt action unless they prepare and hand over a duly-filled checklist giving reasons for the arrest to the Magistrate, who would authorise detention only after recording his satisfaction in a reasoned order.
The four-judge Bench found no fault with the verdict that the dowry harassment law had become a “menace”, more often used as “weapons rather than shields by disgruntled wives”. Justices Anil R. Dave, J.S. Khehar and P.C. Ghose were in the Bench.
Days before his retirement in 2014, Justice Chandramauli Kumar Prasad led a Bench that lamented that courts were filled with mothers-in-law, sisters-in-law and fathers-in-law and husbands facing prosecution under Section 498 A (dowry harassment) of the Indian Penal Code.
Dowry harassment is a cognisable and non-bailable offence. If guilty, a person faces up to three years' imprisonment and fine. Women’s rights groups were irked by the verdict, and the National Commission for Women sought a rare curative relief in the court.
In his verdict, Justice Prasad pointed to a “phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years” even as the “institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country”.
“The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bedridden grandfathers and grandmothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested,” the verdict observed.
Presenting government crime statistics to show that 1.97 lakh people were arrested in 2012 for dowry harassment, nearly a quarter of those being women, the verdict said: “This depicts that mothers and sisters of the husbands were liberally included in their arrest net.”
Lowest conviction rate
More statistics were shared to show Section 498A made up 4.5 per cent of the total crimes charged under different sections of the IPC — “more than any other crimes excepting theft and hurt”.
“The rate of charge-sheeting in cases under Section 498A of the IPC is as high as 93.6 per cent, while the conviction rate is only 15 percent, which is lowest across all heads. As many as 3,72,706 cases are pending trial of which on current estimate, nearly 3,17,000 are likely to result in acquittal,” the verdict observed.
Noting that “arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and cast scars forever”, the Supreme Court had directed the police not to arrest unnecessarily and Magistrates not to authorise detention casually and mechanically.
Highlighting that the “power of arrest is one of the lucrative sources of police corruption”, the court had warned police officers of contempt action unless they prepare and hand over a duly-filled checklist giving reasons for the arrest to the Magistrate, who would authorise detention only after recording his satisfaction in a reasoned order.
Comments
Post a Comment