LexSUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA v. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. JULY 19,2005 [ARIJITPASAYAT AND H.K. SEMA,JJ.] Penal Code-Section 498-A-Constitutional validity of--Held: ls constitutionally valid and cannot be struck down on the ground of misuse. C Legislation-Striking down of-Scope-Held: Possibility of abuse of a provision of law would not invalidate legislation-When there is misuse, it is for the legislature to find out ways to deal with frivolous complaints and allegations. D The grievance o( the petitioner in this writ petition is that innocent persons are being victimized by unscrupulous persons making false .accusations under Section 498-A IPC hence the said provision be declared unconstitutional and ultra vires or in the alternative to formulate guidelines. E Disposing of the writ petition, the Court HELD: 1. If a statutory provision is otherwise intra-vires, constitutional and valid, mere possibility of abuse of power would not make it objectionable, ultra-vires or unconstitutional. In such cases, "action" and not the "section" may be vulnerable. If it is so, the court by upholding the provision of law, may still set aside the action, order or decision and grant appropriate relief to the F person aggrieved. When a provision of law is misused, it is for the legislature to amend, modify or repeal it. It rpay, therefore, become necessary for the legislature to find out ways how the makers of frivolous complaints or allegations can be appropriately dealt with. Till then the Courts have to take care of the situation within the existing frame work. (734-E; 735-C; 736-D) G 2. The object of the provision of Section 498-A IPC is prevention of the H dowry menace. But many instances have come to light where the complaints are not bonafide and have been filed with oblique motive. In such cases acquittal of the accused does not in all cases wipe out the ignomy suffered during and prior to trial. Sometimes adverse media coverage adds to the misery. 730 i SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA v. U.0.1. 731 The question, therefore, is what remedial measures can be taken to prevent A abuse or the well-intentioned provi'iion. (736-C] 3.1. There is no question of investigating agency and Courts casually dealing with the allegations. They cannot follow any straitjacket formula in the matters relating to· dowry tortures, deaths and cruelty. The ultimate objective of every legal system is to arrive at truth, punish the guilty and B protect the innocent. There is no scope for any pre-conceived notion or view. (736-G] 3.2. The role of the investigating agencies and the courts is that of watch dog and not of a bloodhound. It should be their effort to see that an innocent person is not made to suffer on account of unfounded, baseless 'and malicious C allegations. It is equally indisputable that in many cases no direct evidence is available and the courts have to act on circumstantial evidence. While dealing with such cases, the law laid down relating to circumstantial evidence has to be kept in view. (736-G, H; 737-A] Thangal Kunju Musaliar v. M. Venkatachalam Potti, Authorised Official D and Income-Tax officer and Anr., AIR (1956) SC 246 and Budhan Chaudhry · and Ors. v. State of Bihar, AIR (1955) SC 191, relied on. Mafatlal Industries Ltd and-Ors. v. Union of India, (1997) 5 SCC 536; Collector of Customs v. Nathe/la Sampathu Chetty, (19621 3 SCR 786; Maulavi Hussein Haji Abraham Umarji v. State of Gujarat, [2004) 6 SCC 672; E Unique Butyle Tube Industries (P) Ltd. v. U.P. Financial Corporation and Ors., (2003) 2 SCC 455; Padma Sundara Rago (dead) and Ors. v. State, (2002) 3 SCC 533 and Savitri Devi v. Ramesh Chand and Ors., decided by Supreme Court on 28.11.2003, referred to. CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (C) No. 141 of2005. (Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.) Petitioner in person. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by F G ARIJIT PASAYA T, J. By this petition purported to have been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short 'the Constitution') prayer is to declare Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'the IPC') to be unconstitutional and ultra vires in the alternative to formulate guidelines so that innocent persons are victimized by unscrupulous persons H 732 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2005] SUPP. I S.C.R. A making false accusations. Further prayer is made that whenever, any court comes to the conclusion that the alle
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.