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

Q. Examine the balance between protecting women from domestic cruelty and preventing misuse of penal provisions like Section 498A IPC/Sections 85-86 BNS. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

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.

(~320 words)

Sources: 1. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 85 (India Code) — cruelty provision replacing Section 498A IPC 2. NCRB, Crime in India 2023 (Part I) — cruelty by husband/relatives as largest head of crimes against women 3. The Hindu, "Domestic cruelty rules cover live-in couples: SC" (Aug 4, 2026) — Lokesh v. State of Karnataka; Article 14 reasoning; preliminary-inquiry safeguard and burden of proof 4. Law Commission of India, Report No. 243 on Section 498A IPC (2012) — low conviction rate, over-implication, caution on arrest 5. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCR 128, Digital Supreme Court Reports — no automatic arrest; Section 41 checklist 6. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (India Code) — civil protection, residence and maintenance reliefs