BREAKING| No Arrest In 498A FIRs For 2 Months; Refer Cases To Family Welfare Committees : Supreme Court Endorses Allahabad HC Guidelines

(i)No arrest or police action to nab the named accused persons shall be made after lodging of the FIR or complaints without concluding the "Cooling-Period" which is two months from the lodging of the FIR or the complaint. During this "Cooling-Period", the matter would be immediately referred to Family Welfare Committe(hereinafter referred to as FWC) in the each district.

(ii)Only those cases which would be transmitted to FWC in which Section 498-A IPC along with, no injury 307 and other sections of the IPC in which the imprisonment is less than 10 years.

(iii)After lodging of the complaint or the FIR, no action should take place without concluding the "Cooling-Period" of two months. During this "Cooling-Period", the matter may be referred to Family Welfare Committee in each districts.

(iv)Every district shall have at least one or more FWC (depending upon the geographical size and population of that district constituted under the District Legal Aid Services Authority) comprising of at least THREE MEMBERS. Its constitution and function shall be reviewed (25) periodically by the District & Sessions Judge/Principal Judge, Family Court of that District, who shall be the Chairperson or Co-chairperson of that district at Legal Service Authority.

(v)The said FWC shall comprise of the following members :-

(a) a young mediator from the Mediation Centre of the district or young advocate having the practices up to five years or senior most student of Vth year, Government Law College or the State University or N.L.Us. having good academic track record and who is public spirited young man, OR

(b) well acclaimed and recognized social worker of that district having clean antecedant, OR;

(c) retired judicial officers residing in or nearby district, who can devote time for the object of the proceeding OR; (d) educated wives of senior judicial or administrative officers of the district.

(vi)The member of the FWC shall never be called as a witness.

(vii)Every complaint or application under Section 498A IPC and other allied sections mentioned above, be immediately referred to Family Welfare Committee by the concerned Magistrate. After receiving the said complaint or FIR, the Committee shall summon the contesting parties along with their four senior elderly persons to have personal interaction and would try to settle down the issue/misgivings between them within a period of two months from its lodging. The contesting parties are obliged to appear before the Committee with their four elderly persons (maximum) to have a serious deliberation between them with the aid of members of the Committee.

(viii)The Committee after having proper deliberations, would prepare a vivid report and would refer to the concerned Magistrate/police authorties to whom such complaints are being lodged after expiry of two months by inserting all factual aspects and their opinion in the matter.

(ix)Continue deliberation before the Committee, the police officers shall themselves to avoid any arrest or any coercive action pursuant to the applications or complaint against the named accused persons. However, the Investigating Officer shall continue to have a peripheral investigation into the matter namely preparing a medical report, injury report, the statements of witnesses.

(x)The said report given by the Committee shall be under the consideration of I.O. or the Magistrate on its own merit and thereafter suitable action should be taken by them as per the provision of Code of Criminal Procedure after expiry of the "Cooling-Period" of two months.

(xi)Legal Services Aid Committee shall impart such basic training as may be considered necessary to the members of Family Welfare Committee from time to time(not more than one (26) week).

(xii)Since, this is noble work to cure abrasions in the society where tempos of the contesting parties are very high that they would melow down the heat between them and try to resolve the misgivings and misunderstandings between them. Since, this is a job for public at large, social work, they are acting on a pro bono basis or basic minimum honrarium as fixed by the District & Sessions Judge of every district.

(xiii)The investigation of such FIRs or complaint containing Section 498A IPC and other allied sections as mentioned above, shall be investigated by dynamic Investigating Officers whose integrity is certified after specialized training not less than one week to handle and investigate such matrimonal cases with utmost sincerity and transparancy.

(xiv)When settlement is reached between the parties, it would be open for the District & Sessions Judge and other senior judicial officers nominated by him in the district to dispose of the proceedings including closing of the criminal case.

It may be noted that in the 2017 judgment in Rajesh Sharma and others v. State of U.P. and another, the Supreme Court had laid down similar guidelines. However, in 2018, in Social Action Forum, the Supreme Court withdrew these directions, saying that the Court cannot fill in the legislative gaps.

Now, the directions in Rajesh Sharma have been effectively restored to a great extent through the present judgment.

Background

The bench comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih endorsed the High Court's safeguards while deciding a matrimonial case where the wife and her family lodged false cases against the husband and his family, leading to jail terms for the husband and his father.

The Court noted that the husband was jailed for 109 days and his father for 103 days as a result of the criminal cases filed by the wife including serious charges under Sections 498A, 307, and 376 of the IPC.

It observed that "What they have suffered cannot be resituated or compensated in any manner” justifying the public apology as moral redress.

The wife had lodged six separate criminal cases against the husband and his family. In one FIR, allegations regarding domestic cruelty(S.498A IPC), attempt to murder (S.307), rape (376) etc., were levelled. There were two criminal complaints filed alleging the offence of criminal breach of trust (S.406 IPC). Apart from these, there were three complaints under the Domestic Violence Act. The wife also filed Family Court cases for divorce, maintenance etc.

The Court quashed the criminal cases and ordered the marriage as dissolved, invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constituion.

Also from the judgment - Supreme Court Orders IPS Wife & Her Parents To Issue Public Apology To Husband & In-Laws For False Criminal Cases

Also Read - Allahabad HC's Direction To Constitute Family Welfare Committees To Look Into '498A' Complaints Violates Supreme Court Judgments

Case : Shivangi Bansal vs Sahib Bansal

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 735

Click here to read the judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Ms. Abha Jain, AOR Mr. Sumit Kumar, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Trivedi, AOR Mr. Hemant Gupta, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudip Chandra, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Luthra,Sr. Adv. Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, AOR Mr.Mahesh Kumar, Adv. Ms. Srishti Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Dr. Vijendra Singh, AOR Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv. Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Adv. Mr. Ghanshyam Singh, Adv. Mr. Harsh Pratap Shahi, Adv. Mr. Krishna Pandey, Adv. Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, AOR Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Trivedi, AOR Mr. Hemant Gupta, Adv. Ms. Deepika Kalia, Adv. Ms. Vasudha, Adv. Ms. Vasudha Singh, Adv. Mr. Sudeep Chandra, Adv. Mr. Sudip Chandra, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar, AOR Mr. Akshat Srivastava, AOR