CASE TITLE:
Mukesh Bansal Vs State Of Uttar Pradesh & Anr
DATE OF ORDER:
13 TH JUNE, 2022
JUDGE(S):
HON’BLE JUSTICE RAHUL CHATURVEDI
PARTIES:
Petitioner: Mukesh Bansal
Respondent: State Of Uttar Pradesh And Anr
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)
SUBJECT
The Allahabad High Court issued guidelines/safeguards on Monday to prevent the misuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). According to one of the Court's guidelines, no arrest or coercive action should be taken against the accused during the two-month cooling-off period following the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) under 498A IPC.
BRIEF FACTS
- The Court was hearing revision petitions filed by three people (the complainant's in-laws) challenging a Sessions Court order rejecting their discharge applications in connection with an offence registered against them under various sections of the IPC, including Section 498A.
- The wife filed this FIR against her husband and in-laws, alleging, among other things, that his father-in-law desired sexual favours from her and that her brother-in-law attempted to physically ravish her.
- She also claimed that her husband used to lock her in the bathroom after removing her phone, and that her mother-in-law and sister-in-law put pressure on her to have an abortion. When they refused, all of her family members became physical with her.
- It was also claimed that a constant demand for additional dowry was made, and when she refused, she was brutally assaulted with fists and kicks, and maltreated and humiliated to the extreme.
- Taking into account the wife's story, the Court stated that the FIR was not only abhorrent, but also full of dirt, filth, and venomous accusations against her own husband and inlaws.
ANALYSIS BY THE COURT
- The Court found no fault with the lower court's order discharging the accused because the wife/victim was unable to substantiate allegations made by her even during the investigation, and these allegations were found false.
- The Court also expressed its strong opposition to the informant's use of language in the FIR. As a result, the in-laws' revision petitions were granted, but the husband's revision petition was denied.
- Concerning the wife's misuse of Section 498A IPC, the Court stated that nowadays, every matrimonial case is being exaggerated manifold with all the vexing and caustic allegations of dowry-related atrocities involving the husband and all family members.
- During this time, the Court has directed that the matter be referred to a Family Welfare Committee (FWC). It should be noted that Section 498-A punishes a woman's husband or his relatives who abuse her.
CONCLUSION
Thus, after assessing the totality of the circumstances, object, and the allegation of misuse of Section 498A IPC, the Court went on to propose the safeguards, taking guidance from the Apex Court's judgement in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar Vs. Union of India, in order to keep the growing tendency in the masses to nail the husband and all family members with broad and sweeping allegations at bay.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
