BNS 85
BNS Section 85,
Formerly IPC 498A.
The section that covers dowry harassment. Same substance, new number, and a great deal of confusion about which one applies to whom.
BNS Section 85 is IPC 498A with a new number. It came into force on 1 July 2024. The offence, the definition of cruelty and the three-year maximum are all unchanged.
If your case was registered before 1 July 2024 it stays under IPC 498A. If the conduct happened on or after that date, it is Section 85.
On this page
What the section says
Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband
Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
Note who it reaches. Not only the husband: any relative of the husband. That is what allows a complaint to name a mother-in-law, a sister-in-law or a father-in-law, which in dowry cases is very often where the demands originate.
How cruelty is defined
Section 85 does not define cruelty. Section 86 does, and the definition is broader than most people expect.
Cruelty means either of these
(a) Any wilful conduct of a nature likely to drive the woman to commit suicide, or to cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb or health, whether mental or physical.
(b) Harassment of the woman with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for property or valuable security, or on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.
Limb (b) is the dowry limb, and it is worth reading twice. It covers harassment to coerce a demand, and harassment because a demand went unmet. Both directions are offences. And the demand has to be unlawful, which a dowry demand always is.
Three practical consequences follow:
- No bruises are needed. Mental cruelty is expressly included.
- No money needs to have changed hands. The harassment is the offence.
- Taunting counts where it is part of a pattern of pressure over a demand, rather than an isolated argument.
What actually changed in 2024
Very little, and that is the point worth making clearly, because a lot of commentary implied otherwise when the BNS came in.
| IPC 498A | BNS 85 and 86 | |
|---|---|---|
| In force | 1983 to 30 June 2024 | From 1 July 2024 |
| Who it covers | Husband or his relatives | Unchanged |
| Maximum sentence | 3 years and fine | 3 years and fine |
| Definition of cruelty | In the explanation to 498A | Moved to its own section, 86. Wording substantially the same. |
| Cognizable | Yes | Yes |
| Bailable | No | No |
The one genuine structural change is that the definition of cruelty was lifted out of an explanation attached to the offence and given its own section. That is drafting hygiene rather than a change in the law.
Arrest is not automatic
This is the most consequential thing to understand about how these cases actually run, and it comes from case law rather than the statute.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
The Supreme Court held that in offences punishable with less than seven years, police must not arrest as a matter of routine. A notice of appearance is issued first, and a magistrate has to record reasons before authorising detention. The judgment was a direct response to reflexive arrests in 498A cases.
Because Section 85 carries a three-year maximum, the Arnesh Kumar directions apply to it. For a complainant, the practical meaning is that filing a complaint will usually not produce an immediate arrest, and expecting one leads to disappointment with the process. For an accused, it means an FIR is not the same thing as custody.
The misuse argument
Any honest page about this section has to deal with the claim that it is widely misused. It is the most contested provision in Indian family law.
The courts have addressed it directly, and their answer has been consistent: the provision is valid, and misuse by some complainants is not a reason to weaken it for everyone.
Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India
Section 498A was upheld as constitutionally valid. The Court observed that misuse of a provision does not make the provision itself bad law. The frequently quoted phrase "legal terrorism" comes from this judgment, and it refers to misuse of the section, not to the section.
Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P., and what followed
Rajesh Sharma introduced Family Welfare Committees to vet complaints before action. A year later, in Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court recalled that mechanism, holding that a statutory complaint cannot be filtered by a non-statutory body before investigation.
So the position today is that a complaint under Section 85 goes to the police, not to a committee. More judgments here.
How it works with the Dowry Prohibition Act
These are different offences and they are commonly charged together, because they cover different things.
- Dowry Prohibition Act, Sections 3 and 4 reach the transaction. Giving, taking, demanding. Detail here.
- BNS 85 reaches the treatment. The harassment surrounding the demand.
- BNS 80 reaches the outcome, where a woman has died. Detail here.
A single set of facts often supports charges under all of the first two, and the sentences are not alternatives to each other.
If you are being harassed for dowry right now
Related reading
- BNS Section 80, dowry death →
- How to file a complaint →
- All dowry laws in one place →
- Key court judgments →
Sources
Common questions
What is BNS Section 85?
Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 makes it an offence for a husband or a relative of a husband to subject a woman to cruelty. It is punishable with imprisonment of up to three years and a fine. It replaced Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code when the BNS came into force on 1 July 2024.
Is IPC 498A still valid?
IPC 498A no longer applies to offences committed on or after 1 July 2024, but cases registered before that date continue to be tried under it. The IPC was repealed prospectively, so an old case does not collapse or get renumbered. In practice both section numbers will appear in Indian courts for years.
What counts as cruelty under BNS 85?
Section 86 of the BNS defines it. Cruelty means wilful conduct likely to drive a woman to suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to her life, limb or health, whether mental or physical. It also means harassment aimed at coercing her or her relatives into meeting an unlawful demand for property or valuable security, or harassment because such a demand was not met. Mental cruelty and financial coercion both qualify. Physical violence is not required.
Is BNS 85 bailable?
BNS 85 is a cognizable and non-bailable offence. However, following Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014), police may not arrest automatically in offences carrying less than seven years. A notice of appearance is issued first, and a magistrate must record reasons before authorising detention.