The petitioner, Singh, submitted to SC that these laws adversely affect men.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday dismisses PIL that sought to declare Sections 2, 3, 4, and 8A of the Dowry Prohibition Act unconstitutional, advising the petitioner to bring the matter before Parliament.
“We are not inclined to entertain this. Dismissed. Take it to Parliament,” stated the two-judge bench, consisting of Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, in its order.
The petitioner, Singh, argued before the SC that these laws negatively impact men. “These laws are invalid, and as a public-spirited individual, I request appropriate directions or orders,” she stated. However, the Supreme Court found no merit in the petition and rejected it.
Singh’s Public Interest Litigation (PIL) claimed the misuse of women-centric laws, highlighting the malice, unreasonableness, and lack of legal consistency in the provisions.
Challenging the validity of laws under the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, and the provisions concerning cruelty to women in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Singh accused these laws of being misused.
The petitioner requested the Supreme Court to direct the Central government and other authorities to safeguard men from atrocities committed by women filing false complaints and misusing laws intended for their protection.
The PIL argued that the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is discriminatory based on religion and further challenged the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, claiming they are women-centric and discriminatory towards men.
Singh has named the Prime Minister of India, the Union of India (UOI), and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) as respondents in her PIL.