Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which criminalised cruelty by a husband or his relatives towards a married woman, has been replaced by Sections 85 and 86 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, effective 1 July 2024. The BNS splits the provision into two — Section 85 for the offence and punishment, and Section 86 for a standalone statutory definition of cruelty. The substantive content and the maximum punishment of three years remain identical. The structural change elevates the definition of cruelty from an "Explanation" appended to Section 498A into a full independent section.
What changed
| Old law | New law | |
|---|---|---|
| Act | Indian Penal Code, 1860 | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 |
| Section | 498A (offence, punishment, and explanation defining cruelty) | 85 (offence and punishment), 86 (definition of cruelty) |
| Title | Cruelty by husband or relative of husband | Cruelty by husband or relatives + Cruelty defined |
| Change type | Modified — structural split, Explanation elevated to standalone section |
Full statutory text
Section 498A IPC (repealed w.e.f. 1 July 2024)
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.
Explanation — For the purpose of this section, "cruelty" means — (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
Section 85 BNS — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband
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.
Section 86 BNS — Cruelty defined
For the purposes of section 85, "cruelty" means — (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
Key differences
Structural split — offence and definition separated: The most significant change is structural. Under IPC 498A, the definition of cruelty was appended as an "Explanation." Under BNS, it is elevated to a standalone section (Section 86), giving the definition independent statutory status. This makes the definition easier to locate and reference.
Punishment unchanged: The maximum punishment remains imprisonment for up to three years plus fine, identical to IPC 498A. The BNS does not alter the sentence for this offence.
Definition of cruelty unchanged: The two limbs of cruelty — (a) wilful conduct likely to drive the woman to suicide or cause grave injury or danger to life, limb, or health; and (b) dowry-related harassment — are retained verbatim from IPC 498A's Explanation.
Cognizable and non-compoundable nature retained: The offence under Section 85 BNS continues to be cognizable (police can arrest without warrant) and non-compoundable (cannot be settled between parties without the court's permission), maintaining the same procedural character as IPC 498A.
No gender-neutral expansion: Despite academic and judicial commentary suggesting gender-neutral domestic cruelty provisions, the BNS retains the provision exclusively for cruelty against women by husbands or their relatives. It does not extend protection to husbands or to persons in live-in relationships.
What this means for practitioners
For drafting and citations: All FIRs and charge sheets for offences committed on or after 1 July 2024 must cite Section 85 BNS instead of Section 498A IPC. The definition of cruelty should be referenced as Section 86 BNS. Where the charge sheet alleges both types of cruelty (physical/mental cruelty and dowry harassment), both limbs of Section 86 should be specified.
For pending cases: Offences committed before 1 July 2024 continue under IPC Section 498A. There is no substantive change that would affect pending proceedings, as the definition, punishment, and procedural characteristics are identical.
For bail applications: The procedural safeguards established by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) — requiring police to follow a checklist before making arrests under Section 498A — continue to apply to Section 85 BNS. Lower courts and police authorities must comply with these guidelines for the new section.
For anticipatory bail: The guidelines issued in Rajesh Sharma v. State of UP (2017), though partially modified by the larger bench in Social Action Forum (2018), continue to inform judicial approach to anticipatory bail applications under Section 85 BNS. The three-judge bench in Social Action Forum held that the Rajesh Sharma directions regarding Family Welfare Committees were not appropriate but retained the general caution against mechanical arrests.
For quashing petitions: The principles governing quashing of FIRs under Section 498A — particularly the distinction between genuine matrimonial disputes and frivolous complaints — remain applicable to Section 85 BNS. The Supreme Court's consistent position that inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 BNSS) can be invoked to quash proceedings where the allegations, even if taken at face value, do not constitute the offence, continues unaltered.
Does old case law still apply?
The entire body of jurisprudence developed under IPC Section 498A applies without modification to BNS Sections 85-86, as the substantive content is identical.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273 — The Supreme Court directed that police must not automatically arrest the accused upon registration of FIR under Section 498A. Officers must be satisfied that arrest is necessary under the parameters of Section 41 CrPC (now Section 35 BNSS). This safeguard applies to Section 85 BNS.
Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 281 — The Court acknowledged the possibility of misuse of Section 498A but upheld its constitutional validity, holding that the remedy lies in the correct application of the law, not its repeal. This constitutional validation extends to Section 85 BNS.
Rajesh Sharma v. State of UP (2017) 10 SCC 294 and Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 443 — These companion cases established and subsequently refined procedural safeguards for Section 498A complaints. The principles regarding careful scrutiny before arrest remain operative for Section 85 BNS.
Judicial interpretation under BNS 85-86 (post-July 2024)
No post-July 2024 cases directly citing BNS Section 85 (as opposed to IPC 498A) were found in the Veritect database. However, the Supreme Court continued to develop important jurisprudence on cruelty/dowry harassment that will directly govern BNS 85-86.
Key post-2024 development under the IPC precursor
In-laws v. State (CrlA/2025, arising from SLP(Crl.) No. 7597/2025, 16 December 2025) — The Supreme Court addressed the quashing of proceedings under Section 498A IPC against in-laws (mother-in-law and father-in-law) where the allegations were vague and omnibus, without specific instances, dates, or particulars of dowry demand or cruelty. The Court applied its earlier ruling in Dara Lakshmi Narayana v. State of Telangana to hold that general, unparticularised allegations against in-laws do not meet the threshold for prosecution under Section 498A. This decision will directly govern quashing applications under BNS Section 85, reinforcing the requirement for specific, particularised allegations against each accused.
Veritect reference: Diary_23416-2025_Judgment
Emerging patterns
Based on available post-July 2024 orders, the initial judicial approach suggests:
- Continued scrutiny of vague allegations against in-laws: The Supreme Court's insistence on specific, particularised allegations (with dates, instances, and details) before sustaining Section 498A/BNS 85 proceedings against in-laws represents a hardening of the Dara Lakshmi Narayana standard.
- Arnesh Kumar safeguards unaltered: The arrest safeguards from Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) continue to apply fully to BNS Section 85. Police officers must complete the checklist under Section 35 BNSS (successor to Section 41 CrPC) before making arrests.
- Quashing under BNSS Section 528: The inherent powers of the High Court under BNSS Section 528 (successor to Section 482 CrPC) will be the primary vehicle for quashing vague or frivolous BNS Section 85 complaints, applying the same standards developed under the IPC regime.
Frequently asked questions
What is the BNS equivalent of Section 498A IPC? Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, is the direct equivalent of Section 498A IPC. The definition of cruelty is now in a separate Section 86 BNS, rather than being an Explanation appended to the section.
Has the punishment for cruelty changed in BNS? No. The punishment under Section 85 BNS remains identical to IPC 498A — imprisonment for up to three years plus fine.
Do the Arnesh Kumar guidelines apply to Section 85 BNS? Yes. The Supreme Court's directions in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) — requiring police to follow a checklist and satisfy necessity of arrest — apply to Section 85 BNS in the same manner as they applied to Section 498A IPC.
Is Section 85 BNS compoundable? No. Like its predecessor Section 498A IPC, the offence under Section 85 BNS is non-compoundable. The parties cannot settle the case between themselves without the court's permission. However, the High Court retains inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS to quash proceedings in appropriate cases.