NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday in its order rejected a PIL seeking to declare Sections 2, 3, 4 and 8A of the Dowry Prohibition Act as unconstitutional, and asked the petitioner to flag the issue to the Parliament.
"Sorry. We are not inclined. Dismissed. Go and tell the Parliament," said, the two-judge bench of the apex court, led by Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, in its order, on Monday.
The petitioner, Singh, submitted to SC that these laws adversely affect men. "The laws are invalid and I am a public-spirited person. Please issue appropriate directions or orders," she said. The top court did not find any merit in the plea and rejected it.
The Public Interest Litigation (PIL) of Singh, alleged misuse of women-centric laws, as she pointed out the malice in law, the unreasonableness contained in the provisions and the lack of semblance of law in the provisions.
Questioning the validity of the laws related to the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, and the provision on cruelty to women in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Singh alleged that these laws are being misutilised.
The petitioner sought a direction from the apex court to the Central government and other authorities for the protection of men against the atrocities committed by women filing false complaints, abusing the very laws that were meant to protect them from harm.
The PIL said that the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is discriminatory on the grounds of religion and further assails the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 as being women-centric and discriminatory against men.
Singh has made Prime Minister of India, Union of India (UOI) and Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) as respondents to her PIL.