Examine the balance between protecting women from domestic cruelty and preventing misuse of penal provisions like Section 498A IPC/Sections 85-86 BNS.

Section 498A IPC, inserted in 1983 against dowry harassment and now re-enacted as Sections 85-86 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 [1], seeks to shield women inside the home. Its working reveals a continuing tension between deterrence and due process.

Why the protective mandate remains necessary

• Cruelty by husband or his relatives is the single largest head of registered crimes against women in NCRB's Crime in India data [2] — domestic violence is the dominant threat to women's safety.
• The home is a low-visibility space; without a cognizable offence, harassment stays unreported and unpunished.
• The Supreme Court's August 2026 ruling in Lokesh v. State of Karnataka extended the cruelty offence to live-in relationships "in the nature of marriage", reading Article 14 to bar exclusion of women in de facto unions [3].

Concerns of misuse

• The Law Commission's 243rd Report (2012) recorded a low conviction rate and judicially noted "over-implication" and exaggerated complaints [4].
• Omnibus naming of distant relatives converts a matrimonial dispute into mass arrest, damaging reputation and liberty.
• Automatic arrest for an offence punishable up to three years invites coercive settlement rather than adjudication.

How balance is being struck

• Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) barred automatic arrest, mandating a Section 41 checklist and notice [5].
• The 2026 judgment itself adds a preliminary inquiry before arrest and places the initial burden on the woman to establish intent to marry [3].
• Parallel civil remedies under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — protection, residence and maintenance orders — offer graded relief short of prosecution [6].

Protection and procedural fairness are complementary, not competing: a provision that is credibly enforced and sparingly invoked serves genuine victims best. Strengthening family counselling centres, mandatory police training on arrest guidelines, and time-bound investigation would let Sections 85-86 BNS advance both Article 15(3)'s protective mandate and the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty.