Background:

The present case arose from a matrimonial dispute between the parties following a breakdown in their marriage. Shivangi Bansal had filed multiple complaints, including one under Section 498A of the IPC (Now Section 85 & 86 of BNS), alleging cruelty and harassment by her husband, Sahib Bansal, and his family. As the litigation escalated- spanning criminal proceedings, custody battles, property disputes, and maintenance claims, it became evident that the relationship had irretrievably broken down. Amidst these ongoing legal conflicts, the parties reached a comprehensive settlement resolving all pending issues, including the custody of their minor daughter, Raina. The matter came before the Supreme Court, which, while quashing all pending criminal and civil cases, invoked its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant a formal divorce.

Issues

1. Whether the criminal proceedings filed under Section 498A IPC and related matrimonial litigation could be quashed in light of a comprehensive settlement between the estranged spouses?

2. Whether procedural safeguards should be mandated to prevent the misuse of Section 498A IPC, particularly regarding immediate arrests of the husband and his relatives upon filing of FIR’s?

Observations:

The following observations were made by the court:

• • The Court noted a growing trend of misuse of Section 498A, where false or exaggerated allegations are made to harass the husband and his family.
• • Directed that no arrest shall be made for 2 months after registration of a 498A FIR, to allow time for reconciliation or preliminary scrutiny.
• • All complaints under Section 498A must be referred to Family Welfare Centres, which will examine the complaint and submit a report within the cooling-off period.
• • In this case, custody of the minor child was given to the mother, with visitation rights granted to the father, keeping the child’s welfare paramount.
• • The Court acknowledged the amicable resolution between the parties covering property, maintenance, custody, and mutual apologies.
• • The Court endorsed and gave legal backing to the Allahabad High Court’s 2022 guidelines on handling 498A cases responsibly.

Decision:

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and gave the following final decision:

• • All pending criminal and civil proceedings between Shivangi Bansal and Sahib Bansal, including the FIR under Section 498A IPC, were quashed in light of a comprehensive mutual settlement.
• • The Court invoked its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant a formal decree of divorce, as the marriage had irretrievably broken down and both parties consented.
• • The Court formally endorsed the procedural safeguards issued earlier by the Allahabad High Court, including:
• - A two-month no-arrest period after a 498A FIR is lodged.
• - Referral of cases to Family Welfare Committees for preliminary assessment before any coercive action is taken.

Therefore, the Court emphasized the need to prevent misuse of Section 498A IPC, while also ensuring that genuine victims are protected through a more balanced and humane approach to matrimonial litigation.

Why this case matters:

• • The judgment formally recognizes the widespread misuse of Section 498A IPC (cruelty by husband or relatives) in matrimonial disputes.
• • Adds a layer of objectivity and non-police intervention in emotional family matters, potentially reducing unnecessary litigation.
• • This case emphasizes the importance of amicable settlements over prolonged adversarial battles, especially in sensitive cases involving children.
• • The decision made in this case sets a binding precedent that lower courts and law enforcement must follow.

Laws related thereto:

Under Constitution:

• Article 142: Empowers the Supreme Court to pass any order or decree necessary to do “complete justice” in any case before it.

Under IPC:

• Section 498A: Husband or relative husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty

The Court reaffirmed that while Section 498A IPC serves an important role in protecting women from domestic cruelty, it is also prone to misuse as a tool of vengeance.

(Now Section 85 & 86 of BNS)

Judicial Precedents:

• Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014): Established that arrest should not be automatic in 498A cases; police must follow due procedure.

• Rajesh Sharma v. State of UP (2017): Recommended Family Welfare Committees (FWCs) to screen 498A complaints before arrests.

• Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012): Held that non-compoundable offences can be quashed on settlement under Article 142/Section 482.

• Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan (2023): Recognized power of Supreme Court under Article 142 to dissolve marriage on mutual consent.