The bench in the matter observed the ‘IPC Section 498A as weapon rather than the shield.’

“The fact that Section 498-A is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bed-ridden grand-fathers and grand-mothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested.”

The bench referring the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, observed that crime under IPC section 498A was the 4.5 percentage of total crime which was higher than all the crimes except theft and hurt. Also that under the IPC section 498A, more than 47 thousand females were arrested. The bench further observed that the ratio of charge sheet was more than 93 percent while conviction rate was only 15 percent.

“Nearly a quarter of those arrested under this provision in 2012 were women i.e. 47,951 which depicts that mothers and sisters of the husbands were liberally included in their arrest net. Its share is 6% out of the total persons arrested under the crimes committed under Indian Penal Code.”

The bench said that arrest bring humiliation which law makers understand while police has not learnt.

“Arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and cast scars forever. Law makers know it so also the police. There is a battle between the law makers and the police and it seems that police has not learnt its lesson; the lesson implicit and embodied in the Cr.PC.”

Further the bench stated about the need of balance between “individual liberty and societal order”.

“Law Commissions, Police Commissions and this Court in a large number of judgments emphasized the need to maintain a balance between individual liberty and societal order while exercising the power of arrest…Apart from power to arrest, the police officers must be able to justify the reasons thereof. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person…the Parliament had to intervene and on the recommendation of the 177th Report of the Law Commission submitted in the year 2001, Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘Cr.PC), in the present form came to be enacted”

The bench further asked all the State Government to pass appropriate instruction to police officers to stop automatic arrest.

“All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41, Cr.PC;”

Click to get the copy of order of Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr

The other perspective cannot be denied that, the person who is doing investigation has to report in court, has to visit crime scene, patrolling, arresting and even the documentation.

Due to this the investigation officer are over burdened of their work and responsibilities, they are putting less focus on learning. So this will not be wrong to state that, our officers must be trained enough to deal with the family dispute in a friendly manner.

To deal with the misuse of the process of issuing notice to the accuse, Delhi High Court issued guidelines in Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) 41A in the matter of “Amandeep Singh Johar vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr“. In the said matter Acting Chief Justice of Delhi Gita Mittal has played a very strong stand against the misuse.

There are many states where the CrPC-41A is being misused and such reform is needed Nation wide.

So based on above argument and facts, there is a need of Split in Roles and Responsibility of the Investigation agencies.

Law Commission and Home Ministry in year 2013, took step against arrest under Section 498A of Indian Penal Court (IPC) and directions were issued for preliminary inquiry before arrest.

The direction was further taken by Supreme Court of India in year 2014 in the matter of “Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr” and guideline were issued to follow the Sec 41A of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

There is a need of strong provisioning to stop the false cases and the “misuse of process of law” in dowry harassment or domestic violence. This may require certain amendment in IPC182 and IPC211.