Let’s not dilute laws on offences against married women

The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was amended in 1986. These offences have been made cognizable and non-bailable. Special laws are got after gargantuan efforts by dedicated fighters. 

Money transactions are, on the face of it, only civil transactions. But it is given a criminal colour and dishonour of cheques are treated as an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is one of the most abused provisions in criminal law. Moneylenders take undated, unfilled cheques from gullible debtors and fill in exorbitant sums, present the same at far-off places, create jurisdiction at inaccessible courts and abuse the process of law, by filing cases against innocent debtors. This is a classic example of abuse of law. In fact, the Supreme Court and other courts have time and again been confronted with several instances of abuse of various laws. While such abuses are seen as aberration, the laws relating to women are seen to be “used as weapons, rather than as a shield by disgruntled wives.” 

Portraying men and women who have been arrested at the outset but acquitted after trial in cases relating to matrimonial offences as victims, and giving undue importance to save the honour of family bonds have shifted the outlook from seeing these laws as essential rights of women, to that of draconian breakers of families. Unfounded sympathies in favour of the accused due to few cases of abuse of the said law is negating the very purpose of passing these acts and enforcing the same. 

As it is, the Dowry Prohibition Act was watered down by the court orders, directing that complaints of dowry should first be sent to the Dowry Prohibition Officer and whetted before registering a First Information Report under the said Act.  Now the Supreme Court has in the case of Rajesh Sharma & others vs State of UP, restricted the powers of arrest. This was a case of anticipatory bail filed by a husband against his wife’s complaint of cruelty and dowry under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. While dealing with the subject, the Supreme Court had felt that there is an alarming increase in false prosecutions in matrimonial cases. To avoid the same, the Supreme Court has said that in every district one or more Family Welfare Committees be constituted by the District Legal Services Authorities, preferably comprising of three members. All complaints of dowry, cruelty etc. which attract less than seven years’ punishment have to be placed before the said Committee and following the procedure laid down therein, only after an elaborate enquiry can any arrest be effected. 

While bail and jail should be the rule is a commendable diktat, pronouncing this only in cases where women are victims / complainants shows the general apathy towards the cause of women. We are still in a male-dominated world. Protecting women, with special stringent laws is the need of the hour. In the guise of curtailing abuse, watering down the penal provisions is unwelcome. Making perjury as a serious offence, ensuring that those who lie or abuse the law are severely dealt with is the need of the hour and not diluting the hard-earned rights to prosecute those committing offences against married women.