What Is 498A IPC? Everything You Need To Know

I am Supriya Gill, a lawyer and in this article, we will delve deeper into the details of Section 498A IPC, its nature, period of limitation, landmark supreme court judgements on 498A and many more.

Section 498-A was introduced in 1983 with the aim of protecting married women from cruelty at the hands of their husbands or relatives. The offence carries a maximum punishment of 3 years imprisonment and a fine.

The term “cruelty” is broadly defined to encompass physical or mental harm to the woman’s body or health, as well as any acts of harassment intended to coerce her or her family into meeting unlawful demands for property or valuable security.

Harassment for dowry is specifically included in this section. Another aspect of cruelty is creating a situation that may drive the woman to commit suicide.

To know more, read the full article.

Table of Contents

Section 498A of Indian penal code, 1860

Section 498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.

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 fine.

Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, “cruelty means”—

(a) anywilful 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.

Source.

What constitutes ‘cruelty’ as per Sec 498A IPC?

Section 498A defines the term cruelty and provides examples of conduct that constitute cruelty or harassment of a woman.

These examples include conduct that may lead the woman to commit suicide, cause her grave injury, or endanger her life, limb, or mental or physical health.

Additionally, harassment of a woman with the intention of coercing her or her family to meet unlawful demands for property or valuable security, or harassment due to failure to meet such dowry demands, also amounts to cruelty.

In the ordinary sense, harassment or cruelty involves tormenting a person through constant interference or intimidation.

However, if such conduct is done with the intention of coercing the wife or her family to meet property or security demands, it falls under the ambit of harassment as defined in section 498A. Coercion refers to compelling a person to do something by using force or threats.

Nature of offence under Section 498A

The offence under Section 498A has the following characteristics:

Cognizable: This means that the police can arrest the accused without a warrant if the offence has been committed.

Non-bailable: If a complaint is filed under Section 498A, the accused can be sent to court or police custody without the need for a bail hearing.

Non-compoundable: A petitioner cannot withdraw from a non-compoundable case, including a charge under Section 498A. It cannot be settled outside of court, except in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh, where this charge has been recently made compoundable.

Who can file a complaint under Section 498A?

In accordance with section 198A CrPC, initiating criminal proceedings against a husband or his relatives requires the filing of a First Information Report (FIR) or complaint under section 498A IPC.

This complaint can be lodged by the following individuals:

The married woman who is the victim of the offense
Her father

Her mother
Her brother
Her sister

Her father’s brother or sister
Her mother’s brother or sister
Any person related to the woman by blood, marriage, or adoption, with the permission of the court.

Section 498A and dowry demand

Dowry demand is included in the ‘unlawful demand’ as contemplated under Explanation (b) of Section 498A, however, it need not be only demand.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Modinsab Kasimsab Kanchagar vs State Of Karnataka & Anr on 11 March 2013 held that a demand of Rs. 10,000 towards repayment of a society loan though not a dowry demand, was an unlawful demand sufficient to attract Section 498A.

Who is the ‘relative’ of the husband?

Vijeta Gajra vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 7 July, 2010

In order to be covered under Section 498A one has to be a ‘relative’ of the husband by blood, marriage or adoption.

Can the second wife file 498A?

A two-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that even a second wife can file a complaint under section 498A.

Reema Aggarwal vs Anupam (2004): Legal and valid marriage is not necessary to attract section 498A IPC.

Can a woman in live-in-relationship file 498A?

It was held in Unnikrishnan vs State of Kerela, 2017 that a woman in a live-in-relationship is not entitled to file a complaint under section 498A.

Ingredients of Section 498A

Ingredients of Section 498A are:

The woman must be married

She must be subjected to cruelty or harassment

Such cruelty or harassment must be shown either by the husband of the woman or by the relative of the husband.

Period of limitation to file a complaint under Section 498A

As per Section 468 of the CrPC, a complaint alleging the commission of an offence under section 498A can be filed within 3 years of the alleged incident.

However, Section 473 of the CrPC enables the Court to take cognizance of an offence after the period of limitation if it is satisfied that it is necessary to do so in the interest of justice.

Section 498A and Presumption under section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act

When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or a relative of the husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by a such relative of her husband.

Section 113A was inserted by the Criminal Law (second amendment) Act 46 of 1983.

For attracting the provision of 113A the following things has to be proved:

Suicide must be committed by a married woman

Suicide must have been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband

Suicide must be committed within 7 years of marriage

She must have been subjected to cruelty (as defined in 498A of the IPC) by her husband or relatives of the husband.

Judgement: Gurbachan Singh vs Satpal Singh & Ors on 26 September, 1989

It was held in this case that Section 113A of evidence has retrospective operation i.e, it will apply to an offence committed prior to the insertion of Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act.

Judgement: Alka Grewal vs State Of M.P. on 30 July, 1999

It was held that the presumption of 113A is applicable only against the husband, not the wife.

If the woman stays in her maternal house, does not go to her husband’s home or dies of any disease, then this presumption can be denied.

Section 498A and the Protection of women from domestic violence Act, 2005

Juveria Abdul Majid Patni vs Atif Iqbal Mansoori on 18 September, 2014

Even before a criminal court where a case under 498A is pending, if an allegation is found genuine, it is always open to the appellant to ask for relief under Sections 18 to 22 of the Domestic Violence Act and interim relief under section 23 of the Act.

Bail under Section 498A

Bail can be used to secure the release of individuals who have been arrested but not yet convicted of a crime. Offences punishable by a sentence of three years or less in prison or a fine are considered bailable, and these are known as “bailable offences” where bail is a matter of right.

Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code is a non-compoundable, cognizable offence, and bail can be granted by the Magistrate once the police have registered a “First Information Report” (FIR) based on a complaint made by the complainant.

However, to reduce the number of unnecessary arrests under Section 498A, the police are required to follow the method outlined in Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires them to notify the accused of their duty to appear before the police for investigation.

Pre-trial mediation through the CAW Cell/Mahila Thana, etc., is one such measure that has been implemented.

If the woman still wishes to file an FIR after pre-FIR mediation and counselling, she may do so. The FIR cannot be withdrawn by the complainant, but the High Courts have the power under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the FIR.

It is advisable to seek anticipatory bail after an FIR has been filed, and the judge may impose certain restrictions on the defendant, such as depositing a demand draft in the name of the wife or other dependents in an amount equal to the required maintenance, etc.

What options husband has in false 498A complaints?

The husband can a defamation suit under section 500 of the IPC.

Under Section 9 of the CPC, the husband can file for recovery of damages to which he and his family have been subjected for the false allegations of cruelty and abuse.

Section 182 of the IPC is one of the safeguards against false 498A cases widely used. If the authority considers that the averages rendered were invalid, under section 182 of the iPC, the culprit is sentenced to 6 months or a fine or both.

Additionally, if the accused believes that the case filed against them under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code by their wife is false and baseless, they can file a counter lawsuit under Section 227 of the IPC for the violation of the terms of their punishment remission. This legal action can be taken against the wife for her false and frivolous accusations.

A woman who threatens to harm or injure her husband and his relatives can be charged under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for committing the offence of “Criminal Intimidation.” This offence can be tried in a court of law.

In the event that a wife intentionally accuses her husband or his relatives of a false crime under Section 498A, she can be charged with the offence of ‘False Information with intent to injure’ under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code and prosecuted in a court of law.

Judgement on 498A

1. Mirza Iqbal vs the State of UP

The Supreme Court has established a principle that if the family members of a husband are made parties in a case, their direct involvement needs to be established. If direct involvement is not established, the High Court has the duty to quash the FIR against them under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

This principle appears to be aimed at protecting the rights of family members who may be unnecessarily implicated in cases without any direct involvement in the alleged crime. It emphasizes the need for evidence and proof of direct involvement before implicating family members.

It is important to note that this principle applies specifically to cases where the family members of the husband are made parties, and does not necessarily apply to other situations or cases involving different parties.

Overall, this principle reinforces the importance of due process and the need for evidence and proof in criminal cases, while also safeguarding the rights of individuals who may be unfairly implicated in such cases.

2. Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs. State of Bihar on 08.02.2022

The false allegations under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code can have serious consequences for the accused and can result in long and protracted legal battles. The landmark judgment has brought attention to the need for specific and concrete allegations to be made by the complainant, rather than general and omnibus allegations.

The judgment has also emphasized the need to discourage criminal trials that lead to an eventual acquittal, as these can have a significant impact on the reputation and well-being of the accused.

It is important for the courts to carefully examine the evidence presented before them and ensure that justice is served without any bias or prejudice.

Furthermore, the judgment has highlighted the need for a balanced approach to cases involving allegations of domestic violence.

While it is important to provide protection to victims of domestic violence, false allegations can also have serious consequences for the accused.

Therefore, it is important for the courts to carefully consider the evidence presented before them and ensure that justice is served in a fair and impartial manner.

3. Amarjit Singh vs State of Punjab, 1939

The drinking habits of the husband along with coming home late and beating his wife held as cruelty.

4. Manju Ram Kalita vs State Of Assam on 29 May, 2009

In the case of Manju Ram Kalita V. State of Assam, 2009 13 SCC 330, the Supreme Court stated that while Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code was enacted with the noble intention of punishing cruelty inflicted upon a wife by her husband or his relatives, particularly in cases where such cruelty may lead to the wife’s suicide or murder, it should not be misused.

Justices AK Goel and UU Lalit, who presided over the two-judge bench, noted that the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Act 46 of 1983 had made it clear that the provision was aimed at addressing instances of women taking their own lives due to pressure from their in-laws for dowry.

5. Bibi Parwana Khatoon vs State of Bihar (2017)

The Court brought under notice the facts that the appellant in the case did not even reside at the place of the mishap. There was no evidence to prove their charge beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the Court acquitted them

Directions of the Supreme Court in 498A

1. Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 2 July, 2014

According to the woman, her in-laws made unreasonable demands including a payment of 8 lakh rupees, a Maruti car, an air conditioner, and more. She claimed that her husband, upon learning of his mother’s demands, supported her and threatened to marry someone else instead of her.

Additionally, she alleged that she was forced to leave the marital house due to unmet dowry demands. In response, the husband denied the accusations and applied for anticipatory bail from the Supreme Court.

However, since Section 498A is a non-bailable and cognizable offense, the Court noted that women often use it as an offensive tool rather than a defensive one to intimidate their husbands and their families.

Even distant relatives or sick grandparents of the husband are sometimes falsely accused and arrested under this law.

The Court, therefore, established rules mandating reasonable satisfaction and a thorough investigation into the complaint before making an arrest under this provision. The Magistrate cannot issue detention orders arbitrarily or as a matter of habit. Consequently, the Court ordered a nominal bail amount to be set.

In this case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court gave some directions regarding the arrest. A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court observed that Section 498A has become a powerful weapon for disgruntled wives, where innocent people were arrested without any evidence due to the non-bailable and cognizable nature of the law.

The Court asked the Police to follow Section 41A of the CrPC which provides a 9-point checklist which must be used to decide the need for arrest.

2. Rajesh Sharma vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 27 July, 2017

The primary issue addressed in this case was the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC, which often results in the unjust detention of innocent family members.

The Supreme Court recognized the need to establish Family Welfare Committees in each district to investigate complaints filed under this section.

The court directed that no arrest shall be made until the Committee’s report is received, and the report shall be considered by the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate.

Furthermore, the court stated that in cases where a settlement has been reached, the criminal case may be closed by the District and Sessions Judge or any other senior Judicial Officer.

These directives were further modified in 2018 in the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India, 2018 SCC OnLine SC 1501.

Important Topics On 498A IPC

Conclusion

The section was inserted as a safeguard for women against cruelty, but unfortunately, it has been misused by some women.

It is important to note that both educated and uneducated women have misused this section, and in some cases, parents have instigated the complaints.

Ego issues in marital life have also been a factor in some cases, while others have simply used this section to blackmail their husbands. These are some of the reasons why this section has been misused in modern times.

Despite its importance in protecting women in a male-dominated society, the misuse of this section has reduced its significance.

It has become more of a weapon for disgruntled wives rather than a shield. Therefore, it is crucial for everyone to understand the importance of this section and use it only for its intended purpose.

A law’s value lies not in its existence, but in the rightness of its purpose.