logo
SC Freezes Quick Arrests In Marriage Cruelty Cases, Bats For Two-Month ‘Cooling Period'

SC Freezes Quick Arrests In Marriage Cruelty Cases, Bats For Two-Month ‘Cooling Period'

News186 days ago
The Supreme Court was hearing a case where the man and his father had spent over 100 days in jail based on false complaints filed by the wife, an IPS officer
The Supreme Court, while hearing a case where a man and his father spent months in jail after the wife filed several false cases against them, has reaffirmed that no immediate arrests should be made in cases of alleged cruelty by spouses under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Instead, a mandatory two-month 'cooling-off" period will be in place before any police action is considered, upholding guidelines first framed by the Allahabad High Court.
The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih, was hearing a case where the man and his father had spent over 100 days in jail based on false complaints filed by the wife, an IPS officer. Recognising the irreparable harm suffered, the court ordered the wife to issue an unconditional public apology, calling it a measure of moral redress for the wrongful imprisonment sustained by her husband and father-in-law.
According to the guidelines, after an FIR is lodged for cruelty in marriage, police authorities must wait two months before taking any coercive action, including arrest. During this period, cases must be referred to Family Welfare Committees set up in every district, which will review the complaints and try to achieve a settlement. Only cases involving offences punishable by less than 10 years' imprisonment, including 498A, will be referred to these committees. Each Family Welfare Committee will consist of at least three members and will function as an independent review body before further police intervention is permitted.
These directives have their legal roots in the Allahabad High Court's 2022 judgment, which sought to address a worrying trend: the misuse of Section 498A via sweeping, unsubstantiated allegations that could result in entire families—sometimes even extended relatives—being implicated, harassed, and jailed. The Supreme Court, by endorsing these safeguards, has now clarified that such protection is vital to prevent unnecessary arrests and to ensure the criminal justice system is not weaponized in personal disputes.
In the case that led to this decision, the matrimonial discord involved a series of litigations in multiple cities, with over 20 different cases related to domestic violence, maintenance, and criminal charges. The bench observed that what the accused had suffered due to the misapplication of the law 'cannot be resituated or compensated in any manner," highlighting the need for systemic procedural reform.
Legal experts believe that the cooling period and welfare committee review will help to weed out frivolous and malicious complaints, protect those who may otherwise be wrongly ensnared in criminal proceedings, and focus mediation on reconciliation and fair outcomes. Meanwhile, the core protections for genuinely aggrieved women remain intact, as serious allegations supported by strong evidence can still be acted upon—after the initial review.
view comments
First Published:
July 23, 2025, 13:27 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Find out how many temples have governments taken over: SC to petitioner
Find out how many temples have governments taken over: SC to petitioner

Time of India

time17 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Find out how many temples have governments taken over: SC to petitioner

NEW DELHI: A 'shebait' of the Banke Bihari Ji temple at Vrindavan on Monday told Supreme Court that the Uttar Pradesh govt through an unconstitutional ordinance is attempting to take over a privately managed temple in the guise of a development plan. Appearing for 'shebait' Devendra Nath Goswami, senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Amit Anand Tiwari told a bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi that the temple has a corpus of Rs 300 crore and the sole intention of govt is to utilise this money for the Rs 500 crore development plan. While adjourning hearing on the petition, the bench said, "Please find out how many temples pan-India has been taken over by the state govts. Many temples in Tamil Nadu have been taken over by the state govt." Sibal said the temples taken over in Tamil Nadu are public temples, unlike the Banke Bihari Ji temple which has been managed privately by two groups of 'shebaits' as per a Mathura Munsif court's 1939 judicial order. There are no allegations of mismanagement or misappropriation of funds which could have been grounds for takeover, he said. Justice Kant told Sibal, "You go there and find out how it is managed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Stylish Dresses in Tegaldlimo — Don't Miss Out! Dresses | Search Ads Learn More Undo Two groups of 'shebaits' have been fighting for control of the temple since 1938 and have filed many suits. They come to court when govt wants to develop the area to provide devotees with amenities and smooth darshan." The petitioner said the state did not have the legislative competence to promulgate the Uttar Pradesh Shri Banke Bihari Ji Temple Trust Ordinance, 2025, as it seeks to effectuate a forcible state takeover of a private temple. "The temple is admittedly private in character as it is administered by a religious denomination and governed by a judicially sanctioned scheme of management dated June 11, 1939, under which hereditary 'shebait goswamis' alone are vested with the rights and duties of managing the religious and administrative affairs of the deity/temple," he said. "There is no record or finding of mismanagement, fund misuse, or maladministration on the part of the existing 'shebait'-led management. Throughout the years, no allegations of financial irregularity or misgovernance have been levelled," the petitioner said. The impugned ordinance is a "veiled attempt by the state to commercialise and monetise the private temple under the pretext of providing 'world-class amenities' to devotees", he allleged. "The state's approach to the temple is purely utilitarian and economic, treating it as a revenue generating tourist centre rather than as a sacred spiritual institution governed by ancient religious traditions," the petitioner said.

Timely intervention, says Goel; Karti highlights ‘underreporting'
Timely intervention, says Goel; Karti highlights ‘underreporting'

Time of India

time40 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Timely intervention, says Goel; Karti highlights ‘underreporting'

New Delhi: The Supreme Court initiated suo motu proceedings on Monday after reviewing a TOI report about rabies cases resulting from dog bites. "The news item contains some alarming and disturbing figures and facts," the bench observed. Former Union minister Vijay Goel, who has long been championing dog shelters, defined the move as a "timely and much-needed intervention" by the judiciary and said he would present data on the matter. In a press statement on Monday, Goel reiterated his key demands, including amendments to the Animal Birth Control (ABC) Rules, 2023, particularly on allowing relocation of biting dogs to a different place or shelter after sterilisation rather than being released in the original location under Rule 11. A national census of stray canines is also a demand. Goel's campaign has taken on renewed urgency following two dog attacks in Narela and Pooth Kalan, the latter resulting in the death of a six-year-old girl, who succumbed to rabies. Expressing strong objection to ABC Rule 20, which gives RWAs the responsibility of feeding stray dogs within private societies, appealed for a complete ban on street feeding — with legal consequences for violators. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi "I'm trying to save both people and dogs from mutual hatred. If things continue this way, society will turn hostile towards animals," Goel said, responding to dog lovers who have allegedly threatened him online and branded him the 'enemy of animals'. Appreciating the move of the apex court, Congress MP Karti P Chidambaram, who is actively pursuing the matter with the central govt, posted on X, "Hope a holistic process is set into motion. Key asks: Enforce a no-dog-on-street policy, build shelters & house all strays. Vaccinate & neuter them, promote adoption with safety norms, ensure clear, humane & enforceable policy, hear & protect those who feel unsafe and fund authorities to act urgently & responsibly. " Chidambaram had even met PM Narendra Modi to discuss the problem on March 27. He claimed to have written to SP Singh Baghel, Union minister of state for animal husbandry and dairying, on July 24 regarding the review of ABC Rules and formulation of a national strategy to manage stray dogs. In his letter, he highlighted the underreporting of dog bite and rabies cases. "Your ministry has reported 3.7 million dog bites and only 54 suspected rabies deaths in 2024 as per National Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) data. However, multiple independent bodies present contradictory evidence. For example, ICMR's national survey estimates 9 million animal bite incidents annually with up to 5,700 rabies deaths," he wrote. "While WHO maintains that India accounts for nearly 36% of global rabies mortality with 18,000-20,000 deaths annually. Furthermore, the health ministry's Integrated Disease Surveillance Programme (2023) reported 286 rabies deaths — a sharp contrast to NCDC's 2024 figure of 54." The MP said that while ABC Rules might seem progressive in theory, it had "failed structurally and operationally". Chidambaram stated that sterilisation targets were routinely missed, and in most urban areas, they reached only 20-40%, far below the 70%+ required for an impact. "Municipalities suffer from severe manpower shortages, lack of coordination with NGOs and administrative paralysis. While the estimates suggest 6-10 dog bite incidents per minute, with serious injuries, the right of safety of citizens, especially children and the elderly, is being compromised," he maintained. Nanita Sharma, Supreme Court lawyer, contended that modifications to ABC Rules would be ineffective without committed sterilisation and immunisation efforts. "The problem is that govt and agencies are hand in glove and none of the agencies are doing their job diligently," Sharma said. "Had the municipal authorities sterilised and immunised 70% of the strays regularly, then the street dog population would have been contained. Relocation will, in fact, make it difficult to cover all strays. There is a need also to act logically and humanely towards these animals to reduce man-animal conflict. "

Telangana HC hears Vacate Petitions filed by senior IAS and IPS officers on land at Nagaram
Telangana HC hears Vacate Petitions filed by senior IAS and IPS officers on land at Nagaram

The Hindu

time41 minutes ago

  • The Hindu

Telangana HC hears Vacate Petitions filed by senior IAS and IPS officers on land at Nagaram

The High Court of Telangana on Monday heard the Vacate Petitions filed by senior IAS and IPS officers and questioned the writ petitioner Birla Mallesh about his locus standi to file the writ petition concerned with Survey No. 194 of Nagaram village. Senior counsels appearing for the officers, have pointed out that Birla Jangamma, mother of the writ petitioner, had already filed a writ petition in the year 2024 and it was disposed. The writ petitioner with a malafide intention to tarnish the image of IAS and IPS officers has not disclosed the WP filed by his mother and disposed of in 2024 to the High Court, they argued. Senior counsels P. Raghuram and Chandrasen Reddy have further argued that the petitioner, after obtaining interim orders stating Survey No. 194 of Nagaram village as Bhoodan land, has changed his stand that the land is not Bhoodan land but government land. The petitioner also suppressed various material facts misrepresenting that Survey No. 194 of Nagaram village is a Bhoodan land. The counsel for petitioner sought two weeks of time from the Court, but the Court declined the request and posted the matter to tomorrow (July 29) for hearing.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store