The Supreme Court is set to hear a public interest litigation (PIL) on Monday, which seeks to declare unconstitutional several laws that allegedly target men and unfairly presume them to be aggressors in domestic disputes.
According to the causelist published on the apex court’s website, a bench of Justices BR Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran will hear the matter on February 3. The petition requests the court to declare Sections 2, 3, 4, and 8A of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961; Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; its equivalent in the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023; Sections 2 and 3 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; and Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as unconstitutional and invalid for violating fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution and India’s international human rights obligations.
“The impugned provisions primarily target men, allowing allegations to be treated as proof of guilt and creating a framework of presumed culpability that contravenes the fundamental principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty,’” stated the petition filed by advocate Pankaj Sharma. The petition argues that these laws unfairly presume men as aggressors in domestic disputes, thereby violating the right to a fair trial.
The petition further contends that dowry is misrepresented as a practice inherent to Hinduism, despite historical evidence of its origin in Roman, Greek, and Christian traditions. Hindu religious texts do not advocate for dowry practices; thus, laws that target Hindus in this context are arbitrary, discriminatory, and violate Article 15, which prohibits discrimination on religious grounds.
The plea asserts that imposing dowry laws on Hindus while excluding Muslims represents an arbitrary cultural misrepresentation and propagates an inaccurate stereotype. According to the petition, Section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act links dowry with Hindu marriage practices, creating a false narrative that disparages Hindu culture by artificially creating an association without factual or historical basis.
Similarly, the petition argues that Sections 3 and 4 of the Act insinuate that the vice of dowry is prevalent among Hindus and strengthens the concept of dowry by penalizing Hindu men on mere presumption of dowry demand or the presumption of taking or abetting dowry.
“Section 8A of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, imposes a burden of proof of innocence upon the accused, contravening the principle of presumption of innocence until proven guilty, which forms the bedrock of natural justice,” the petition adds.
The petition also challenges the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, arguing that it presumes women to be “aggrieved persons” based on their allegations and automatically categorizes men as “respondents.”
“The dowry laws and Section 498A of the IPC are misused as tools for harassment and extortion, especially against men and their families. These laws reflect a presumption of guilt, thereby denying men their right to a fair trial,” the petition contends.
The plea further argues that such weaponization reveals the malice embedded in these laws, promoting injustice rather than fairness, and violating Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. Placing an implicit presumption of guilt upon men while presuming women as victims, disregarding individual circumstances or evidence, represents discrimination based on sex, infringing upon Article 15 of the Constitution and perpetuating societal bias.
