PIL in SC seeks to declare laws ‘targeting men’ as unconstitutional
text_fields
New Delhi: A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Supreme Court seeking a direction to declare several laws as unconstitutional for allegedly targeting men and unfairly presuming them as aggressors in domestic disputes. The PIL challenges provisions under the Dowry Prohibition Act, Indian Penal Code, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, and the Hindu Marriage Act.
The petition, filed by advocate Pankaj Sharma, asks the court to declare Sections 2, 3, 4, and 8A of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, and equivalent provisions under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, Sections 2 and 3 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and Section 12(1)(c) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as unconstitutional. The plea contends that these provisions violate fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution and India's international human rights obligations.
The petition asserts that these laws unfairly target men by allowing allegations to be treated as proof of guilt, undermining the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, a core principle of justice. The laws are said to disproportionately treat men as aggressors in domestic conflicts, violating their right to a fair trial.
Furthermore, the petition challenges the portrayal of dowry as an inherent Hindu practice, noting that historical evidence links dowry to Roman, Greek, and Christian traditions, not just Hinduism. It claims that laws targeting dowry practices misrepresent Hindu culture and violate Article 15, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion.
The PIL also points out the imposition of dowry laws on Hindus, while Muslims are excluded, calling this cultural misrepresentation arbitrary and discriminatory. It asserts that Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act wrongly presuppose the commission of dowry-related offenses, while Section 8A imposes the burden of proof on the accused, contradicting the principle of presumption of innocence.
The petition further critiques the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, which it claims automatically categorizes men as respondents based on allegations made by women, without evidence, thus assuming men are guilty by default. It argues that such presumptive guilt violates the right to a fair trial and reflects a presumption of guilt rather than fairness, which is a violation of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The plea concludes that these laws, when weaponized, promote injustice and societal bias, perpetuating discrimination based on sex and infringing upon individual rights, particularly those of men.
The matter is scheduled to be heard by a bench of Justices BR Gavai and K. Vinod Chandran on February 3.
With IANS inputs