Matrimonial Cruelty Against Men In India:Legislative Gaps, Judicial Safeguards, And The Case For Gender-Inclusive Protection

Abstract

Matrimonial cruelty in India occupies an intersection between criminal law, matrimonial law, constitutional equality and gender-specific protective legislation. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) retains a gender-specific criminal offence under sections 85 and 86 concerning cruelty by a husband or his relatives towards a woman, whereas matrimonial law recognises cruelty as a ground for dissolution of marriage available to either spouse. This structural distinction raises questions about substantive equality, access to remedies, procedural fairness and the legal position of men who experience serious matrimonial harm. The present study adopts a doctrinal and exploratory empirical design. The doctrinal component examines the statutory transition from section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, to sections 85–86 BNS, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Article 14 and Article 15(3) of the Constitution, and leading Supreme Court decisions concerning misuse, arrest, omnibus allegations and individualised criminal responsibility. The empirical component examines perceptions relating to forms of matrimonial cruelty, social and legal consequences, legal awareness, judicial/procedural safeguards and support for legislative reform. The supplied dataset reports 200 responses and indicates relatively high perceived recognition of matrimonial cruelty and strong support for procedural and institutional reform. Judicial/procedural safeguards show the strongest association with support for legislative reform. Because the supplied manuscript does not provide independently auditable raw-data output, the statistical results are treated as reported study results rather than independently verified population estimates. The study argues that procedural safeguards and substantive protection should be analytically separated: protection against arbitrary criminal process does not itself create a legal remedy for men experiencing matrimonial cruelty. Reform should therefore preserve legitimate protections for women while strengthening accessible, gender-inclusive matrimonial remedies, evidence-based adjudication, legal awareness, counselling, legal assistance and proportionate procedural safeguards..

Keywords: ;; ; ; ; ;; ;