Section 498A IPC criminalises cruelty by a husband or his relatives against a married woman, punishable with imprisonment up to three years and fine. Under Indian law, this provision was introduced in the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by the Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 and is now replaced by Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).
Legal definition
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 provides:
Section 498A IPC: 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.
The term "cruelty" is defined in the Explanation to Section 498A:
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.
New law equivalent: Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), this offence is covered by Sections 85 and 86. Section 85 BNS contains the substantive offence (cruelty by husband or relatives), while Section 86 BNS separately defines "cruelty" in the same terms as the Explanation to Section 498A IPC. The punishment remains identical — imprisonment up to three years and fine. The offence continues to be cognizable and non-bailable.
How courts have interpreted this term
The Supreme Court has grappled extensively with Section 498A, balancing the protection of married women against the prevention of misuse.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [(2014) 8 SCC 273]
The Supreme Court issued landmark guidelines to prevent routine arrests under Section 498A. The Court observed that Section 498A had become "a powerful weapon rather than a shield" and that the chargesheeting rate in 498A cases exceeded 90% while the conviction rate was only 15% — the lowest across all heads of crime. The Court directed all states to instruct police officers not to automatically arrest accused persons under Section 498A unless the conditions under Section 41(1)(b)(ii) CrPC are met, and mandated issuance of a notice under Section 41A CrPC as the default procedure. Magistrates were directed not to authorise detention unless the arresting officer's reasons for arrest were recorded and found satisfactory.
Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India [AIR 2005 SC 3100]
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 498A IPC, rejecting the argument that the provision was unconstitutional due to its potential for misuse. However, the Court acknowledged that "the mere possibility of misuse does not render a law unconstitutional" and observed that "misuse of Section 498A is legal terrorism." The Court called for safeguards to prevent false implications while maintaining the provision's protective purpose.
Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P. [(2017) 10 SCC 472]
The Supreme Court initially constituted Family Welfare Committees in every district to scrutinise 498A complaints before arrest. However, this direction was subsequently modified in Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India (2018), where the Court recalled the Family Welfare Committee direction, holding that it effectively diluted the protection available to women under the statute.
Why this matters
Section 498A occupies a unique and contentious position in Indian criminal law. It was enacted to combat the serious problem of dowry-related cruelty and the alarming number of dowry deaths in India. The provision filled a significant gap — prior to 1983, married women subjected to cruelty by their husbands or in-laws had no specific criminal remedy. Its classification as cognizable and non-bailable reflects the legislature's intent to treat matrimonial cruelty as a serious offence requiring immediate state intervention.
However, Section 498A has also generated substantial controversy. The Supreme Court has repeatedly noted its misuse as a tool for harassment, particularly the naming of distant relatives — including elderly parents and siblings living abroad — in complaints. The extremely low conviction rate compared to the high chargesheeting rate suggests that a significant proportion of cases do not ultimately sustain judicial scrutiny.
For practitioners, the Arnesh Kumar guidelines represent the most important operational framework when advising clients in 498A matters. Defence counsel should ensure that the investigating officer has complied with the Section 41A CrPC notice requirement before any arrest. For complainants, it is critical to understand that Section 498A addresses a specific category of cruelty — dowry-related harassment and conduct likely to drive the woman to suicide or cause grave harm — and that general matrimonial discord does not constitute cruelty within the meaning of the statute. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 provides a parallel civil remedy that offers injunctive relief without the criminal consequences of Section 498A.
Related terms
Broader concepts:
Related offences:
Procedural aspects:
Frequently asked questions
Is Section 498A bailable or non-bailable?
Section 498A IPC (Section 85 BNS) is a cognizable and non-bailable offence. This means the police can arrest without a warrant and bail is not available as a matter of right from the police station. However, following the Arnesh Kumar guidelines (2014), arrest is not mandatory — the police must first issue a notice under Section 41A CrPC (now part of Section 35 BNSS) and arrest only if the statutory conditions for necessity of arrest are met.
Can Section 498A be filed after divorce?
Yes. Section 498A deals with cruelty during the subsistence of the marriage. A complaint can be filed even after divorce if the acts of cruelty occurred during the marriage. However, it must be filed within the limitation period of three years from the date of the offence under Section 468 CrPC (Section 512 BNSS).
What is the punishment under Section 498A?
The punishment is imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and fine. Since the maximum imprisonment does not exceed seven years, the Arnesh Kumar guidelines apply, and the Magistrate must examine the necessity of arrest before authorising detention.
Can 498A charges be quashed?
Yes. The High Court can quash Section 498A proceedings under Section 482 CrPC (Section 528 BNSS) if the allegations, even if taken at face value, do not constitute the offence. The Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) also clarified that compounding or settlement between the parties may be a ground for quashing, particularly where matrimonial disputes have been resolved amicably.
What is the difference between Section 498A IPC and the Domestic Violence Act?
Section 498A IPC (Section 85 BNS) is a criminal provision that leads to prosecution, arrest, and imprisonment. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) is a civil law that provides protection orders, residence orders, monetary relief, and custody orders. The DV Act covers a broader range of relationships (including live-in partners) and a broader definition of domestic violence (including economic abuse). A woman may pursue remedies under both simultaneously.
This entry is part of the Veritect Indian Legal Glossary, a comprehensive reference of Indian legal terminology grounded in statutory text and judicial interpretation.
Last updated: 2026-03-27. Veritect provides this content for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.