Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, which criminalised cruelty by a husband or his relatives toward a wife, is now Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The text is materially the same. The maximum sentence — three years and a fine — is unchanged. The Supreme Court guardrails on arrest, including Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014), continue to apply.
What has changed is the procedural framework. Arrest, bail and quashing are now governed by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Quashing of an FIR or charge sheet, formerly under Section 482 CrPC, is now under Section 528 BNSS. The Karnataka High Court continues to exercise this inherent power on the same principles laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014).
The reality of the first 48 hours
Most Section 85 BNS matters begin with a complaint at a Bangalore police station, often the All Women Police Station (Mahila Police), Vyalikaval, Halasuru or the territorial station depending on jurisdiction. Following the Arnesh Kumar guidelines, arrest is no longer automatic in offences punishable up to seven years. The investigating officer is required to record reasons for arrest and serve a notice under Section 35 BNSS for appearance.
In practice, what we see in Bangalore is a mix — some stations follow the guidelines carefully, others do not. The single most important step on day one is securing anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS before arrest occurs.
Anticipatory bail strategy
Anticipatory bail is heard either by the Sessions Court or the Karnataka High Court. We typically file at the Sessions Court first — the High Court generally expects the lower forum to be approached unless there is good reason. The grounds emphasise:
- Cooperation with investigation — willingness to appear, surrender documents, submit to interrogation.
- Absence of risk of absconding — Bangalore residence, family ties, employment.
- No likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses.
- Where applicable, lack of specific allegations against named relatives — particularly elderly parents and married sisters in distant cities.
The Supreme Court in Geeta Mehrotra (2012) and Kahkashan Kausar (2022) has been direct about the need to scrutinise omnibus allegations against extended family. Bangalore courts apply this distinction routinely, particularly for relatives not residing in the matrimonial home.
After bail — the long tail of the matter
Anticipatory bail is the start, not the end. The investigation continues, a charge sheet is typically filed within ninety days, and the trial follows in the appropriate Magistrate Court. In Bangalore, Section 85 BNS trials before Magistrate Courts run for two to four years on average, sometimes longer.
During this period, parallel proceedings often run — Domestic Violence application, divorce petition, maintenance application. We treat these as a single matrimonial bundle and coordinate strategy across all of them. Inconsistent positions across forums are the most common self-inflicted harm.
Quashing under Section 528 BNSS
Where the parties have arrived at a settlement — typically as part of a mutual consent divorce — the criminal proceedings can be quashed by the Karnataka High Court under Section 528 BNSS. The Supreme Court in Gian Singh (2012) held that matrimonial offences, though non-compoundable, can be quashed on settlement because their continuation no longer serves any public interest.
The quashing application is typically included as part of the settlement bundle in mutual consent matters. The High Court hears it as a writ petition under Section 528 BNSS, and quashing has generally been granted where the settlement is genuine and the parties appear in person.
Where quashing is harder
Quashing on grounds of vague or general allegations — without a settlement — is a higher bar. The Supreme Court has set out illustrative principles in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992), recently applied in matrimonial cases such as Kahkashan Kausar (2022). Where the FIR contains no specific date, place or attributable act against a named relative, quashing as to that person is regularly granted by the Karnataka High Court. For the principal accused — the husband — quashing without settlement is unusual.
What we tell clients on the first call
Do not contact the complainant. Do not retaliate on social media. Do not destroy or alter any digital communications. Document your own version of facts, with dates, in writing — but do not publish it. Cooperate with investigation through counsel, not directly. And accept that the matter will take longer than feels reasonable; the strategy must be steady.
If you are facing a Section 85 BNS proceeding in Bangalore — or anticipate one — message us on WhatsApp at +91 63634 69138. The first conversation is privileged and we will tell you honestly what the realistic shape of your matter is likely to be.
Discuss your matter with us.
Articles can only go so far. Every legal matter has its own facts. Reach out for a confidential consultation.