In the courtroom corridors where justice is sought, matrimonial disputes stand out as a uniquely complex category of cases. They are emotionally charged, legally intricate, and socially impactful. Having practiced law for several years, I have observed a troubling trend—marital litigation is increasingly being weaponized as a tool for vendetta rather than a quest for justice.
India’s legal framework for matrimonial disputes, particularly laws like Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)/ Section 84 of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023 and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, was designed to protect women from harassment, abuse, and violence. These provisions have, without a doubt, provided much-needed relief to countless women in distress. However, their misuse has created an alarming counter-narrative—one where these laws are being wielded as weapons of retribution rather than shields for protection.
Litigation: A Path to Settlement or Extortion?
The primary purpose of the judiciary in matrimonial disputes should be to resolve issues, ensure justice, and facilitate amicable settlements wherever possible. However, the reality often unfolds differently. Many cases drag on for years, burdening both parties emotionally and financially. The prolonged litigation process frequently becomes less about justice and more about targeting a “sweet number”—a financial settlement that one party can extract from the other.
Take the case of Rajesh Kumar & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2017), where the Supreme Court acknowledged the misuse of Section 498A as a tool to harass and coerce the accused. The Court observed that false complaints under this provision often result in prolonged litigation, forcing families to concede to unreasonable settlements simply to end the ordeal. The decision introduced guidelines for Family Welfare Committees to scrutinize allegations before legal action is initiated—an important step, though implementation remains inconsistent.
Similarly, in Preeti Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand (2010), the Supreme Court noted that the involvement of the groom’s extended family, often including elderly parents and siblings living far away, highlights the malicious intent behind many complaints. The misuse of these provisions not only clogs the judiciary with frivolous cases but also detracts from the focus on genuine instances of harassment.
A System Tilted Too Far?
There is no denying that our matrimonial laws are heavily inclined in favor of women. This bias, while well-intentioned, creates a legal imbalance. It often leaves the groom and his family defenseless against false accusations, with limited recourse for proving their innocence. The social stigma associated with such cases exacerbates their plight, even when allegations are baseless.
The story of Amit (name changed for anonymity), a software engineer, is a poignant example. His wife filed multiple cases against him and his family, including allegations of domestic violence and dowry harassment, after a dispute over financial contributions to household expenses. Despite providing evidence of his wife’s extravagant spending and the absence of dowry demands, Amit’s family endured years of litigation. Eventually, the case was dismissed as frivolous, but not before irreparably damaging familial relationships and careers.
At the same time, it is essential to recognize that the original intent behind these laws remains valid. Women in India, particularly in rural and patriarchal settings, continue to face systemic oppression and violence. These laws were—and still are—necessary to protect those who lack the resources or societal support to defend themselves. However, the pendulum has swung too far, necessitating a recalibration to ensure fairness and equity.
The Need for Judicial Prudence and Reform
The misuse of matrimonial laws underscores the urgent need for judicial prudence. Courts must distinguish between genuine grievances and malicious litigations. Mechanisms such as pre-litigation mediation and stricter penalties for filing frivolous cases can serve as deterrents against misuse.
For instance, courts should emphasize mediation before the registration of an FIR in matrimonial disputes. The Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2014) judgment directed that arrests in dowry cases should not be made automatically and without proper investigation. Implementing this directive more rigorously could prevent unnecessary arrests and harassment.
Furthermore, reforms should aim for gender-neutrality in laws governing harassment and domestic violence. Men, too, can be victims of emotional and physical abuse, though such cases often go unreported due to societal stigma. Expanding the scope of these laws to address abuse holistically could create a more balanced legal framework.
A Call for Societal Change
Beyond legal reforms, there is a pressing need for societal change. Matrimonial disputes often arise from deeply ingrained cultural expectations and rigid gender roles. Education and awareness campaigns can play a crucial role in fostering healthier relationships and reducing conflicts. Families must also play a more constructive role, prioritizing resolution over retaliation.
The concept of marriage itself must be reframed—from a transaction between families to a partnership between individuals. Mutual respect and communication should be emphasized, while societal pressures to conform to outdated norms should be challenged.
Conclusion
Matrimonial laws were never meant to be weapons of vendetta; they were tools of justice and protection. It is imperative for lawmakers, the judiciary, and society at large to address the growing misuse of these laws while ensuring their original purpose is not diluted.
A legal system that is fair and impartial is the cornerstone of any civilized society. As we move forward, the goal should not merely be to win cases but to heal relationships and provide justice in its truest sense. Only then can matrimonial disputes evolve from battlegrounds into pathways for reconciliation and closure.
Adv. Jayendra Dubey
JD's Law Blog 
This is really insightful the laws which are supposed be an armour are being used as a weapon. In the long run these frivolous cases divert the attention and resources from the actual victims!
LikeLike