Safeguards or Snares?

Law is the expression of the will of society and its supreme power. Society is run and governed by law. The governance systems enact laws to give justice and fair play to different segments of the population. But the laws more often than not do suffer from frailty. International conventions, laws and agreements are equally suffering from frailty as in domestic affairs. India is a country of more than 142 crore people with a colourful variety of cultural biodiversity. Laws are made to ensure dignity, justice, equality and protection, and welfare of marginalised and vulnerable sections of society. However, on several occasions, these laws are more often than not misused and become a serious problem for the lawmakers and the judiciary. The medicine is becoming a poison, doing more harm than justice in many spheres of law enforcement. In this article, I am dealing with the misuse of laws enacted for protection in India, such as those addressing women’s maltreatment and the protection of the Scheduled Caste and Tribes against discrimination and atrocities. Similarly, there are parallels in international laws like those under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and the way caucus-type administration of world bodies like the United Nations.

When these “medicinal” laws—intended to heal societal injustice and discrimination—are misused, they can become “poisonous,” causing grave harm to individuals, undermining trust in legal systems, and creating new forms of injustice, thus undermining the rule of law. There are several laws for the safety of women in India: the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, on domestic violence, while the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, provides mechanisms to prevent and address sexual harassment at the workplace. Apart from this, Sections 498-A (now covered under Sections 85 and 86 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita) and 354 (Sec 74 of BNS) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) criminalise cruelty by husband/relatives and assault/criminal force to outrage a woman’s modesty, respectively.

Several cases have been reported where women file complaints under the Domestic Violence Act to pressure or falsely implicate husbands and their families in marital disputes, even when evidence of abuse is lacking. Former Attorney General Soli Sorabjee criticised the broad definition of verbal abuse, noting its potential for misuse. Additionally, a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Supreme Court in 2024 highlighted instances where the law was used to suppress husbands’ families in unrelated disputes, and the Supreme Court has acknowledged misuse concerns, directing that complaints under IPC Section 498-A be vetted by Family Welfare Committees before arrests to curb false cases. Similarly, in the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace Act, 2013, and Vishakha Guidelines issued after the Supreme Court’s judgement in Vishakha versus State of Rajasthan, there are instances where false allegations have been used at the drop of a hat to settle professional rivalries or personal grudges, especially in high-profile cases. The lack of stringent verification mechanisms can lead to severe reputational damage for the accused before investigations are complete. There are cases when innocent people were sent to jail for almost 10 years, and then the charges were dismissed. Who is going to pay for ruining the lives of innocent persons, as there is no provision in any Act to provide punishment for false cases?

The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act)—enacted to prevent atrocities and crimes against SCs and STs, to address caste-based discrimination and violence, in accordance with Articles 15 and 17 of the Indian Constitution, which prohibit discrimination and untouchability. It defines specific offences as “atrocities” and provides for special courts, victim relief, and rehabilitation. There are several cases of misuse, and the Act faced criticism, with surveys indicating high rates of false cases. For example, a Madhya Pradesh survey found 75% of cases under the Act to be false, and Rajasthan police data suggested around 40% were fake. Notable cases include a man committing suicide after being threatened with a case under the Act and another spending 20 years in prison due to false allegations of rape and caste-based abuse. Similar cases are reported all over under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, and the Child Abuse Act, 2012.

Now, what are the reasons that the medicine is becoming poison? Both the societal and systemic factors, along with vague and broad definitions of the Acts punishable, are responsible for the misuse of the law. Use of words like “emotional abuse” or “humiliation” can be interpreted subjectively, enabling misuse. The lack of verification and the previous fiat of courts to immediately arrest on complaints opens the door for revengeful false complaints. Further, in caste-driven rivalry, laws meant to empower marginalised groups can be weaponised in personal or community conflicts. Another factor is judicial burden, as such cases take a long time to settle. But the most important factor is the lack of gender and other neutrality in all such laws, leaving them no recourse to counter the abuse.

At the international level, the recent imposition of tariffs by U.S. President Trump on India is a blatant misuse of international laws on trade, but this is a matter to be discussed separately. Now the question is what the solution is. Justice demands that even if there is an iota of doubt or poor investigation by the police, the criminals are set free under the principle that no innocent person should be convicted. Now the society is moving forward, and we need to bring in necessary safeguards in our laws so that stringent punishments are brought for false complaints and cases. In the 21st century, we need to protect the marginal and vulnerable sections of society with full protection, but at the same time, we must ensure that felonies are not committed by individuals of a felonious mindset to settle scores.

Views expressed are personal. The writer is former Director-General and Chancellor in the Ministry of Environment and Chairman of Centre for Resource Management