'For Parliament To Do' : Supreme Court Dismisses PIL To Reform Domestic Violence & Dowry Laws
The Supreme Court today(January 27) dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking directions to ensure that the husband and his family members are not harassed in false cases of domestic violence and under dowry laws.The PIL was filed in the wake of the suicide of a man named Atul Subhash allegedly due to harassment by his wife through matrimonial cases. It was filed by Advocate Vishal...
The Supreme Court today(January 27) dismissed a Public Interest Litigation seeking directions to ensure that the husband and his family members are not harassed in false cases of domestic violence and under dowry laws.
The PIL was filed in the wake of the suicide of a man named Atul Subhash allegedly due to harassment by his wife through matrimonial cases. It was filed by Advocate Vishal Tiwari seeking directions to the Union to implement the observations made by the Supreme Court in Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand(2010) and Achin Gupta v. State of Haryana(2024).
Appearing in person, Advocate Tiwari reiterated that he is seeking a review of the anti-dowry laws and domestic cruelty judgments. However, the bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma, not inclined to entertain the same, asked him to either withdraw or the Court will dismiss it.
When Tiwari stated that liberty must be granted to make a representation at the appropriate forum, Justice Sharma warned him against the same. He said: "Supremacy of the Parliament is there. They are the ones making the law...Then, you will come with the second petition for contempt that they are not deciding your representation. Your name will keep on appearing in the newspaper and media. We cannot make a law. It is for the Parliament to make a law."
"Society must change. We cannot do anything. Parliamentary laws are there. Society has to change," Justice Nagarathna remarked.
Particularly, Justice Nagarathna pointed out that there is a contradiction in the third prayer- which is that when dowry is prohibited in law, how can the petitioner seek that gifts and articles received during marriage be recorded?
In Preeti Gupta, the Court had flagged the abuse of Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, whereby the husband and his relatives are unnecessarily dragged into criminal cases alleging domestic cruelty against the wife, and urged the legislature to make changes. In Achin Gupta, the Supreme Court urged the Parliament to consider amending the counterpart of Section 498A IPC in the new criminal code (Sections 85 and 86 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) to prevent its abuse. However, the BNS, which came into operation with effect from July 1, 2024, has retained the provision.
"..we would like to observe that a serious relook of the entire provision(S.498A IPC) is warranted by the legislation. It is also a matter of common knowledge that exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number of complaints. The tendency of over-implication is also reflected in a very large number of cases, the court said in Preeti Gupta's case.
The petitioner sought the constitution of an expert committee of retired judges, eminent lawyers and legal jurists to review and reform existing dowry and domestic violence laws and suggest measures to prevent their misuse.
He further sought directions that marriage registrations should also record the articles/gifts given during marriage. Citing the suicide of Atul Subhash, which sparked intense online debates, the petitioner contended, "the time has come to make review and reforms in existing Dowry laws and Domestic Violence Act so that its misuse and abuse could be stopped and innocent men can be saved and real purpose of the Dowry laws may not be defeated."
Case Details: VISHAL TIWARI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR., W.P.(C) No. 25/2025
Also from the hearing -Advocate Must Avoid Being A Litigant & Must Never Become A Surety : Justice BV Nagarathna