Citation: Janshruti v. Union of India, 2025 INSC 536 (Supreme Court of India).
New Delhi, 15 April 2025, the Supreme Court of India has dismissed a PIL challenging the constitutional validity of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, now Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The petition, soughts balanced protection in matrimonial disputes, safeguards against misuse of Section 498A, and mandatory preliminary investigations before filing such cases. However, the Bench emphatically rejected the challenge, holding that the mere possibility of misuse does not render a law unconstitutional.
“Misuse Exists, But So Does the Need” – Supreme Court
Acknowledging the growing discourse around misuse, the Court observed:
“We are cognizant of the growing discourse highlighting instances where the provision may have been misused. However, it must be borne in mind that for every such instance, there are likely hundreds of genuine cases where Section 498A has served as a crucial safeguard for victims of domestic cruelty.”
The Court further condemned efforts by individuals attempting to dismantle the law by circulating videos depicting dowry exchanges. It emphasized that dowry continues to be a “deeply entrenched social evil”, especially in rural and marginalized areas, and that many victims suffer in silence.
“The harsh truth is that dowry continues to persist… A significant majority of such cases go unreported, with countless women compelled to endure injustice in silence.”
Constitutional Validity Upheld
Refuting the claim that Section 498A violates Article 14 (Right to Equality), the Supreme Court reiterated that:
“The plea that such provision is violative of Article 14 is wholly misconceived… Article 15 of the Constitution explicitly empowers the State to make special laws for the protection of women and children.”
The Court held that the provision is a result of positive discrimination, enacted in furtherance of Article 15(3) to protect vulnerable groups, especially women.
“We find no justification to interfere with the legislative process… nor are we inclined to transgress the well-established boundaries of the doctrine of separation of powers.”
On Allegations of False Cases
While the Court agreed that misuse is a concern, it drew a sharp distinction between individual misuse and constitutional infirmity, stating:
“Even in the context of Section 498A, this Court has reiterated that while misuse must be guarded against, the provision cannot be trivialized or undermined merely because it has, in some instances, been invoked unscrupulously.”
It added that “crying wolf” cannot be a legal strategy, and allegations of misuse must be tackled through case-by-case adjudication, not through striking down the law itself.
“this Court has also cautioned that it is not to be treated as a tool to prank assistance or as a means to ‘cry wolf’”, Supreme Court
Author’s Perspective for Men’s Rights
While the ruling upholds the law, this judgment may come as a blow to men’s rights groups and falsely accused husbands, many of whom have faced arrest and social stigma due to unverified allegations under Section 498A. Hence men’s rights groups should continue to advocate for gender-neutral family laws and mandatory preliminary inquiries.
