Massive inconsistency in 498a unexplored??
Manav Kalia
(Querist) 08 December 2011
This query is : Resolved
498a as described in penal code: “Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. The offence is Cognizable, non-compoundable and non- bailable." Now I had posted this question about why can't MIL file a case against DIL. Since the DIL is a relative of MIL's husband. The argument that DIL cannot harass MIL for dowry, is not valid, as 498a by definition is not dowry specific as given in the definition above. There are many other acceptable forms of cruelty that are non dowry related. But the generally accepted view among lawyers is only wife or DIL can file 498a. But the definition does not mention wife, DIL or dowry at all. Then why is this massive inconsistency there? Is this a badly worded law, or is the Indian legal system very flawed, or am I missing something from the picture completely. Since I asked the same in general forum, yet could not get any concretely satisfactory explanation there. I am asking this to the experts in law over here hoping some esteemed luminary of LCI must be able to shed light on the matter. Thanks in advance.... :-) This might seem a very redundant question, but the implications are enormous, if even one court in India allows a 498a case against DIL or wife by MIL, going purely by the very definition of the law, then I am sure ninety percent of the false 498a cases will be withdrawn soon after. It might not happen ever, but raises an interesting argument in the higher courts by MIL accused under 498a, that accuser culpable of same offense under same section as accused. For right now it seems to be an unassailable weapon in the hands of the wife / DIL. Which is harming Indian family life beyond repair. Please comment..
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 08 December 2011
Mirage:
Never mind repeating,
But also repeat on different Platform, till Government, M.P. S, Parliament is compelled to improve upon this act, that damaging and harassing family, without any gain to anyone.
Lots will support you.
Adv Shroff
08-12-2011
Manav Kalia
(Querist) 08 December 2011
Sorry for repeating.. Did it by mistake.. Did not think the first post went thru so posted again.. My bad.. Apologies everyone.... We can just work on first post.. Request the admin to delete this one..
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 08 December 2011
:-)
Go to NCW too.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
Manav Kalia
(Querist) 08 December 2011
Sorry for ignorance, what is ncw? Thanks..
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 08 December 2011
NCW = National Commission for Women, New Delhi, India.
Manav Kalia
(Querist) 08 December 2011
Thanks for ncw and take it to CAW also?? .. ;-)
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 08 December 2011
CAW » Committee for Asian Women
IF YOU DO NOT KNOW THESE THEN HOW CAN YOU JUSTIFY USING "MIL"& "DIL"???
Manav Kalia
(Querist) 08 December 2011
I meant CAW 'crime against women', I did not know ncw only..
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 08 December 2011
oH!
So it was also like mil dil caw.my guess was then erroneous.
Manav Kalia
(Querist) 08 December 2011
No problem at all.. :-) @ prabhakar
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 09 December 2011
You have already accepted your mistake so there was no occasion/need for any expert to get replying in the similar way.
A. A. JOSE
(Expert) 09 December 2011
I have already given by views in response to your previous query.
Manav Kalia
(Querist) 09 December 2011
I had posted the second query by mistake, and already asked the admin to remove it..@ Mr baroda
R Trivedi
(Expert) 17 January 2012
The law is not badly worded. Yes this 498 is being misused, but if at all this question of law (MIL/DIL/FIL etc..) is raised before higher courts, then they would refer to the law commission deliberations before enactment of this law. There is a very sound deliberation and recording made in the process of making the law. This recording will give an idea to honorable Judges to assess the intentions of the legislature in framing the law. Intentions behind this law is known to you also.
