Delhi High Court flags trend of adding rape charges to matrimonial disputes to force settlements

The Delhi High Court on Friday flagged a growing trend of women leveling severe sexual misconduct charges in matrimonial disputes to force their in-laws into settling the cases with hefty amounts of money.

Justice Girish Kathpalia made the observation while staying trial court proceedings against two brothers-in-law of a woman who had accused them of rape and cruelty.

The Court found substance in the arguments that severe charges like rape (Section 376 IPC) and molestation (Section 354A IPC) are increasingly being added to bypass restrictions on automatic arrests in dowry harassment cases.

"A trend is setting in where the complainants have started alleging such serious charges of rape, molestation and similar other sexual misconduct only to ensure that the in-laws of the complainant are compelled to settle the matrimonial disputes by paying hefty amounts," the Court observed.

The Court noted that this shift gained momentum after the Supreme Court’s landmark 2014 judgment in Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar, which narrowed the scope of automatic arrests in cases under Section 498A (dowry cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to curb the abuse of the provision.

The Court was hearing a petition seeking the quashing of an FIR registered against two men, who were accused by their brother's estranged wife or cruelty and rape.

Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, appearing for the accused brothers-in-law, argued that the FIR was born purely out of revenge.

He recounted that the complainant's husband filed for divorce in September 2023, and the wife (complainant) subsequently lodged the police complaint seven months later in April 2024.

The accused also highlighted a major discrepancy in the wife's allegations.

When the initial FIR was lodged in April 2024, it contained no allegations of rape against the brothers-in-law. However, two months later, while recording her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC, she alleged for the very first time that she had been raped by them way back in 2017.

The petitioners argued that there was no explanation as to why the complainant remained silent about an alleged rape for seven long years.

Taking note of the arguments and as an interim relief to the petitioners, the Court ordered that the trial court proceedings against them be stayed.

The matter is scheduled to be heard next on November 17, 2026.

Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra appeared along with Advocates Ansuiya and Shivaansh Maini for the petitioners (accused).

Hemant Mehla, Additional Public Prosecutor, appeared for the State.

[Read Order]