In the petition, mother said that there should be equal law for husband and wife… Supreme Court said- discussion should be held in Parliament, not in court

The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a petition seeking a gender neutral approach to the provisions related to dowry harassment, maintenance and domestic violence. Gender neutral approach means that men should get protection in the same way as women have. An NGO had filed a petition alleging that there have been many instances of husbands and their families being harassed by these laws.

On this, the bench of Justice Suryakant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh said, ‘We understand that this will become a spicy news, but tell us which provisions of the law are not being misused? Such statements cannot be made that these laws made for women’s safety and empowerment were misused. Instead of NGOs, the victims should approach the court.’ The Supreme Court bench said, ‘The allegation that the provision is being misused is vague and evasive. No opinion can be formed in this regard. It is enough to say that such an allegation can be investigated on a case-to-case basis.’

The court said – why should we follow foreign countries

The NGO’s lawyer said that in India only women can register cases of domestic violence, whereas in foreign countries husbands can also register such cases and demand maintenance. On this, Justice Suryakant said, ‘… So you want us to make laws. Making laws is not the job of the court. There are MPs for this. We cannot abolish any provision just because there are examples of its misuse. Why should we follow other countries? We maintain our sovereignty.’
The court asked, where is the example of misuse of 498A
The petitioner argued that some provisions like Section 498A are being misused by women. On this, Justice Suryakant orally remarked that such a broad and generalized thing cannot be said. There may be a possibility of misuse, but a provision which has been made for the protection and empowerment of women should not be attacked in this way. He said, “We understand that it is a spicy news that section 498A is being misused, so where are the examples of it?” When the counsel for the petitioner said that examples have been given in the petition, the bench said that the aggrieved parties should approach the court themselves.

The court said, do not make such allegations on the law

The counsel said that the NGO is constantly receiving complaints of misuse of the process of law and he cited the data of the National Crime Records Bureau in this matter. The bench said that it does not want to go into the figures at the moment and suggested that the counsel can keep the data to refer to it in the appropriate case. The apex court said, “We are not denying that the provisions are not being misused, but the court has to look into it on a case-by-case basis. One day, you will find a case where a woman is beheaded by her husband. Do you want us to apply this concept of ‘misuse’ there? Do not make such broad allegations on a provision.”

What was the case?

This petition was filed by an NGO and demanded that guidelines be made for providing maintenance and sections 125-128 of CrPC, section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, relevant sections of Indian Civil Protection Code 2023 be declared gender neutral. Along with this, section 498A IPC should be amended to provide balanced protection to all parties. There should also be a provision for compensation for persons suffering from false allegations.

Such a petition was also rejected in February

The Supreme Court in February dismissed a PIL challenging some provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act and alleging misuse of laws related to women. A bench headed by Justice BR Gavai had said that you can raise all these issues in Parliament. The petitioner argued that the laws made for the protection of women are being misused, thereby violating the rights of men. The petition challenged the provisions of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and Section 498A of the IPC.