Supreme Court order weakens protection for domestic violence victims

Source: The post Supreme Court order weakens protection for domestic violence victims has been created, based on the article “A Court ruling with no room for gender justice” published in “The Hindu” on 12th August 2025. Supreme Court order weakens protection for domestic violence victims.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2- Mechanisms, laws, institutions and bodies constituted for the protection and betterment of vulnerable sections.

Context: In Shivangi Bansal vs Sahib Bansal (July 2024), the Supreme Court upheld a suspension of arrest or coercive action under Section 498-A IPC for two months after a complaint. This decision, based on questionable premises, risks weakening protections against domestic cruelty and undermines gender equality.

Legislative Background and Purpose of Section 498-A

1. Addressing Domestic Violence: Section 498-A IPC, introduced in 1983, penalises cruelty against a wife by her husband or his relatives with up to three years’ imprisonment and a fine. Cruelty includes dowry harassment, driving a woman to suicide, or causing harm to life or health.
2. Socio-Cultural Context: The law was enacted amidst rising dowry deaths and severe domestic violence. Parliament’s intent was to cover all forms of cruelty in marriage, complementing other laws like the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
3. Policy-Maker’s Deliberation: The legislation followed detailed parliamentary study, recognising systemic gender inequality and the need for strong legal redress.

Judicial Directions and Supreme Court Endorsement

1. Allahabad High Court’s Blanket Protection: The High Court directed that no arrest or coercive action occur for two months after filing a complaint, with cases referred to family welfare committees.
2. Supreme Court’s Approval: The Supreme Court endorsed this approach without detailed examination of broader socio-political consequences or fully hearing the State government.
3. Consequences for Complainants: The ruling delays arrests even in severe cases, risks complainant safety, legitimises police inaction in marital cruelty complaints, and discourages reporting.

Limits of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Criminal Offences

1. Appropriate Contexts for Mediation: Conciliation may be suitable for divorce or custody disputes, given their emotional and sensitive nature.
2. Inapplicability in Serious Violence Cases: Where allegations involve violence under penal law, mediation cannot substitute criminal investigation and prosecution.

The ‘Misuse’ Narrative

1. Judicial Observations on Misuse: Past judgments, including Preeti Gupta (2010), Sushil Kumar Sharma (2005), and Arnesh Kumar (2014), referred to misuse concerns and imposed arrest restrictions.
2. Lack of Empirical Evidence: Despite such claims, no concrete nationwide data proves systemic misuse. Courts deal with individual disputes, which do not justify overriding legislative intent.
3. Conviction Rates Misinterpreted: An 18% conviction rate in 2022 is higher than for several offences. Low rates stem from investigative flaws, social pressures, evidentiary challenges, and the high criminal burden of proof—not necessarily false complaints.

Data and Ground Realities

1. NCRB and NFHS Findings: NCRB recorded 1,34,506 cases under Section 498-A in 2022. NFHS-5 shows significant under-reporting of violence in many States.
2. Rising Cases Reflect Awareness: Reports, like one by Humsafar, attribute increased cases to growing legal awareness among women, not widespread misuse.
3. Potential for Misuse in Any Law: All laws carry misuse risks, but allegations’ veracity should be tested through proper investigation, not pre-emptive suspension.

Implications for Justice and Legal Consistency

1. Undermining Victim Protection: Suspending the law selectively leaves victims more vulnerable and reduces access to timely justice.
2. Impact on Criminal Law Uniformity: Applying stricter tests to specific provisions disrupts the uniform application of criminal law.
3. Contradicting Settled Principles: The Court earlier affirmed that misuse is no ground to invalidate a law (Sushil Kumar Sharma, 2005). The current approach undermines this precedent, narrowing the justice window for victims of cruelty.

Question for practice:

Evaluate how the Supreme Court’s two-month suspension of arrests under Section 498-A affects victim safety, police investigation, and uniformity of criminal law.