Expressing concern over a “growing tendency to misuse” laws meant to protect women from cruelty, the Supreme Court has asked that cases of dowry harassment be handled with care so that innocents are not victimized. The remarks come amidst a national debate over the suicide of a 34-year-old man in Bengaluru.
The 80-minute video left behind by Atul Subhash, who killed himself, accused his estranged wife Nikita Singhania and her family of framing multiple cases against him with the motive of extortion. Criticizing the system of justice in a 24-page suicide note, he was frustrated over the legal battles that faced him.
The Supreme Court’s observations came while it quashed an order of the Telangana High Court refusing to quash a dowry harassment case against Subhash, his parents, and other relatives. The court said the allegations made by the wife were “vague and omnibus” in nature and some of the accused had no direct relation with the case. “A mere naming of family members in such cases, without alleging their involvement, should be nipped in the bud,” the court said, pointing to a well-documented pattern of implicating all family members during marital disputes.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and N Kotiswar Singh, while emphasizing the need for the courts to exercise prudence in such cases to prevent misapplication of the provisions under the law and to avoid any unwarranted harassment of innocent relatives of the husband, further pointed out that Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code punishes cruelty against women by the husbands or their relatives, aiming at quick state intervention when this takes place, though in fact its misuse has been at an all-time high.
In recent years, matrimonial disputes have surged, often accompanied by heightened tensions within marriages. The court observed that vague and generalized allegations during these conflicts can lead to the exploitation of legal processes, prompting personal vendettas against husbands and their families. The court clarified that it does not intend to silence women who have experienced cruelty but aims to prevent cases like Subhash’s, where a counter-complaint was filed in response to a petition for divorce.
In the video, Subhash explained that he married Nikita in 2019 after being matched through a matrimonial website. A son was born to them in the next year. He accused his wife’s family of demanding huge amounts of money time and again. In 2021, Nikita ran away from their Bengaluru house as he refused. The very next year, she booked him and his family with various charges like murder and unnatural offenses, saying he sought dowry of ₹10 lakh, which caused the heart attack of her father. Subhash countered the allegation, saying her father was suffering from ill health since before.
In his suicide note, Subhash blamed the legal system, writing, “The more I work hard, the more my family will be harassed and extorted.” He concluded that his death would end the harassment of his elderly parents and brother. The observations by the Supreme Court are a timely reminder that laws meant to protect victims have to be applied with balance so that they do not become tools for personal vendetta.
