498A Cases by the Numbers: What 18 Lakh+ Court Records Show

Last updated: 28 September 2026. Figures were re-read from the eCourtsIndia index on 23 September 2026. The headline count rose from 16.24 lakh (13 August 2026) to 18.43 lakh as more district-court records were indexed.

On 23 September 2026, a full-text search for “498A” in the eCourtsIndia index returned 18,43,705 court records. That is not a count of unique FIRs. It is every indexed matter in the district courts, High Courts and Supreme Court where Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023) appears in the case title, the act-and-section field, the AI keywords or the order text. Of those records, 6,35,539 (34.5%) are pending and 12,06,979 (65.5%) are disposed. Almost all of the backlog sits in district courts. High Court 498A matters are 93.2% disposed. Every number below is a dated reading of a live index that keeps growing.

For context, NCRB’s Crime in India 2024 recorded 1,20,227 cases of cruelty by husband or his relatives, the largest category of crimes against women that year.

The index updates continuously, so treat every figure here as a dated snapshot, not a frozen census. The headline figure comes from the eCourtsIndia API/MCP full-text search with facets switched on, read on 23 September 2026 (see Methodology and limitations below). A website search for 498A may show a different total.

Key takeaways

• 93.6% of indexed 498A records are district-court files, 6.3% High Court and 0.1% Supreme Court.
• District pendency is 36.4%. High Court pendency is only 6.8%. The unresolved pile is magistrate and sessions trials.
• The settlement-and-quash pathway under Section 482 CrPC, now Section 528 BNSS, opened by B.S. Joshi (2003) and Gian Singh (2012), is how High Courts close settled matters. It is not how magistrate trials end.
• Patna High Court has the most 498A records (38,073), almost all filed as Criminal Miscellaneous. Allahabad High Court records the most “498A quash” matches (8,780 of 25,061).
• The 2018 rise in this index is a High Court effect. District filings dipped that year, and both district filings and NCRB registrations rose in 2019.

What is Section 498A, and what replaced it under the BNS?

Section 498A was inserted into the Indian Penal Code by the Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983, after the Joint Committee of the Houses of Parliament that examined the working of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 commented on the rise in dowry deaths. It punishes a husband or his relative who subjects a woman to cruelty with imprisonment of up to three years and a fine.

The offence is non-bailable and non-compoundable. It is cognizable when the aggrieved woman, a relative by blood, marriage or adoption or, if there is no such relative, a public servant of a class notified by the State Government gives the information to the police. Parties cannot compound it at any stage. That last feature drives most of the High Court litigation that follows.

Because the section is non-compoundable, parties who reach a settlement (a divorce decree, a return of stridhan, meaning the woman’s own property, or a maintenance arrangement) cannot simply drop the FIR. They have to approach the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and ask it to use its inherent powers to quash the proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court recognised that route for non-compoundable matrimonial offences in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675 and reaffirmed it in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. Almost all 498A work above the magistrate court rests on this line of judgments. Trial courts work differently: their 498A cases move through bail and trial.

From 1 July 2024, Section 498A IPC was replaced by Section 85 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Section 86 of the BNS defines “cruelty” for Section 85, mirroring the explanation that used to sit inside Section 498A (see our IPC to BNS section mapping). Procedure moved from the CrPC to the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the High Court’s inherent powers now at Section 528 BNSS instead of Section 482 CrPC (see the CrPC to BNSS section mapping).

The substance is the same. The BNS applies to offences committed on or after 1 July 2024. Conduct before that date is still charged under Section 498A IPC, so both citations will appear in new filings for years. eCourtsIndia search captures both because the order text is indexed in full, though a phrase search for Section 85 plus BNS is noisy because other statutes also have a Section 85.

You can read the current text of the successor provisions, Section 85 and Section 86 of the BNS, on IndiaCode by eCourtsIndia, a free section-by-section republication of 10,000+ Acts (911 Central, 9,175 State). The Government’s official text is on India Code.

What we counted, and how

We searched eCourtsIndia’s index for every record that mentions 498A and split the results by status, court and filing year. The exact queries, definitions and limits are in Methodology and limitations near the end of this post.

The searchable field combines the CNR, parties, advocates, judges, the act-and-section text, case type, AI keywords, AI order summaries and the full order text. That is why a party name that contains “498a”, a respondent named “QUASH” and a bail petition that merely mentions the section all match. It is also why “498A conviction” is a word hit, not a count of convictions. Each matter carries a CNR, the 16-character Case Number Record, so any single record can be checked on its own.

Coverage is uneven. Uttar Pradesh district courts account for 5,26,289 of the 17,25,029 district hits, about 30.5%. West Bengal follows with 2,79,392 and Bihar with 1,85,907. Tamil Nadu district courts show only 1,999. Low counts are a labelling and ingest question, not proof that a state has few 498A cases. State counts reflect how each state’s courts label the act and section and how much of each state is indexed. They are not crime rates.

How many 498A cases are pending, and in which courts?

Here is the 18,43,705-record corpus by status on 23 September 2026.

Status	Records	Share
Disposed	12,06,979	65.5%
Pending	6,35,539	34.5%
Other (admitted, allowed, dismissed, hearing, withdrawn and similar)	1,187	0.1%

Split the same search by court level and the pendency story changes.

Court level	498A records	Share of corpus	Pending	Pending share
District courts	17,25,029	93.6%	6,27,668	36.4%
High Courts	1,16,163	6.3%	7,869	6.8%
Supreme Court	2,494	0.1%	n/a	1,327 marked disposed; the rest carry Supreme Court labels (admitted, allowed, dismissed, hearing)
Tribunals	19	under 0.1%	n/a	n/a

Counts depend on the query. This post counts any record where 498A appears in the title, act field, AI keywords or order text. Posts that use a narrower query, such as our Supreme Court matrimonial analysis, report a lower Supreme Court figure.

A statute where more than a third of district records are still pending has a throughput problem. That fact alone does not settle whether 498A is overused or essential, and it is not a picture of High Court quashing petitions sitting idle. For how long cases take across Indian courts, see the Indian Disposal Time Index 2026.

Which High Courts hear the most 498A cases?

The largest High Court slice is Patna (BRHC01) at 38,073, not Allahabad. Most Patna records are filed as Criminal Miscellaneous (36,945 of 38,073). In Patna that case type largely covers bail applications, a reading based on the case-type label rather than a sampled check. Patna’s 498A records are 99.93% disposed.

Allahabad (UPHC01) holds 23,834 records, about 20.5% of the High Court slice, and it is 77.3% disposed. Its top case-type labels are Criminal Revision (10,675), bail (5,902) and criminal petitions (4,270), because many Section 482 applications carry revision-style codes in the court’s own system. Case types are each High Court’s own labels as published on eCourts. We have not reclassified them.

Court	498A records	Disposed share	Top case type	Live search
Patna HC (BRHC01)	38,073	99.93%	Criminal Misc (CR_MISC)	search
Allahabad HC (UPHC01)	23,834	77.3%	Criminal Revision (CR_REV)	search
Kerala HC (KLHC01)	10,375	99.97%	Criminal Misc (CR_MISC)	search
Bombay HC (HCBM01)	5,749	97.0%	Writ Petition (Civil) label	search
Karnataka HC (KAHC01)	4,720	99.3%	Criminal Misc (CR_MISC)	search
Delhi HC (DLHC01)	4,507	92.8%	Criminal Misc (CR_MISC)	search
Supreme Court (SCIN01)	2,494	53.2% marked disposed	Criminal appeals and SLPs	search

Kerala, at 99.97% disposed, has the highest disposed share among large High Courts in this index, with Patna close behind. Read those shares as High Court clearance plus the way records are indexed, not as proof that every Kerala 498A trial finishes quickly. The Supreme Court’s status vocabulary is not the district-court PENDING and DISPOSED pair, so its share is not directly comparable.

How do settled 498A cases end? Quashing in the High Court

If you ask the index how often order text or AI keywords mention particular words alongside 498A, you are mostly measuring High Court orders. District courts almost disappear from these queries because most magistrate records have no searchable order body.

Keyword pair	Records	Disposed	Disposed share	Live search
498A quash	25,061	22,437	89.5%	search
498A mediation	14,681	11,834	80.6%	search
498A compromise	12,085	11,539	95.5%	search
498A conviction	11,821	10,787	91.3%	search
498A acquittal	5,205	4,628	88.9%	search
498A maintenance	21,582	20,071	93.0%	search

Allahabad High Court has the most “498A quash” matches: 8,780 of 25,061 (35.0%), then Kerala (4,347), Karnataka (2,336), Delhi (1,887), Telangana (1,330) and Bombay (970). That pathway, a High Court mediation centre, a compromise affidavit and a quashing order under Section 482 CrPC or Section 528 BNSS, is how High Courts close settled 498A matters. It touches about 1.4% of the 18,43,705-record corpus. Most 498A files never reach a quashing petition.

How has the Supreme Court shaped Section 498A?

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has returned to Section 498A many times. The judgments below frame the current law. The Court upheld the section in 2005 and dismissed a fresh challenge in 2025.

B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675. The first major judgment that a High Court could quash 498A proceedings, although the offence is non-compoundable, where the parties had settled. It opened the settlement-and-quash pathway that now dominates High Court 498A cases.

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. A three-judge bench reaffirmed and extended B.S. Joshi, holding that the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC can be used to quash non-compoundable matrimonial offences where the parties have genuinely settled.

Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273. Binding guidelines that police must not arrest in 498A cases without recording reasons, and that magistrates must not authorise detention mechanically. It is an arrest-procedure judgment. It did not make FIRs easier or harder to file.

Rajesh Sharma v. State of U.P., AIR 2017 SC 3869 (27 July 2017, Justices A.K. Goel and U.U. Lalit). The court directed every district to set up a Family Welfare Committee to screen 498A complaints before any arrest. The directions were widely read as restricting the use of the section.

Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India (2018) 10 SCC 443 (14 September 2018). A three-judge bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A.M. Khanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud held that the Family Welfare Committee directions were not in accord with the statutory framework and set them aside. It ruled that where the parties settle, they can approach the High Court under Section 482 CrPC, which decides the matter applying Gian Singh. The Court also modified how the remaining 2017 directions apply.

Shivangi Bansal v. Sahib Bansal, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 735 (22 July 2025). A bench of Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice A.G. Masih directed that guidelines framed by the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in a judgment of 13 June 2022 remain in effect and be implemented by the authorities. The guidelines provide a two-month “cooling period” after a 498A FIR or complaint, with no arrest or coercive police action in that period, and refer the matter to a Family Welfare Committee in each district. Committee screening, set aside in Social Action Forum, is back through these High Court guidelines.

Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India (2005) 6 SCC 281. The Court upheld Section 498A against a constitutional challenge. It held that the mere possibility of abuse does not make a law invalid, and that until the legislature acts, courts must deal with misuse within the existing framework.

Janshruti (People’s Voice) v. Union of India, W.P. (C) 315 of 2025, decided 15 April 2025 (CNR SCIN010021522025). A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh dismissed an Article 32 petition that sought gender-neutral domestic-violence provisions and challenged the validity of Section 498A. The court held that the possibility of misuse does not make a provision unconstitutional and that Article 15 permits special protective laws for women. The order refers to the BNS successor as “Section 84”; the provision that replaced 498A is Section 85 BNS, with Section 86 defining cruelty.

For how individual Supreme Court judges have approached matrimonial cases, including 498A, see our analysis of Supreme Court divorce and alimony judgments.

Five sample orders

The numbers mean little without reading a few real orders. These five illustrate the settlement-quash line and one apex-court appeal. They are not a census of 498A cases. We have left out party names, case numbers and FIR details from the High Court orders to protect the privacy of the families involved. The Supreme Court judgment below is a reported decision.

Delhi High Court, 2008. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court quashed a 2005 FIR under Sections 498A and 34 IPC after the couple had divorced in 2006 and settled alimony. It saw no purpose in letting the magistrate proceedings continue.

Karnataka High Court, March 2025. The court quashed proceedings under Sections 498A and 506 IPC after the couple reunited. It held that continuing the prosecution after an amicable resolution would be an abuse of process.

Kerala High Court, 2013. The court allowed a quashing petition the day after it was filed, on a reconciliation affidavit, citing B.S. Joshi and Gian Singh. A one-day disposal is real, but it does not by itself explain Kerala’s High Court disposal rate.

Supreme Court, 2019. Wasim v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2019) 7 SCC 435 (CNR SCIN010360642018, Criminal Appeal 1061 of 2019). Justices L. Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta allowed the appeal on 18 July 2019. The trial court had convicted under 498A and 306 IPC. The Delhi High Court had acquitted on 306 and upheld 498A. The Supreme Court set aside the remaining 498A conviction because the High Court had found no cruelty for the purposes of 306 yet convicted under 498A on a dowry demand that the trial court had found not proved. The appellant therefore stood acquitted.

Delhi High Court, 2003. The court quashed a 2003 FIR under Sections 406, 498A and 34 IPC after the couple reconciled and were living together. It shows how long this line of cases has been settled.

You can open the Supreme Court record on eCourtsIndia case search to read the full order, the bench and the procedural history.

Did 498A filings jump in 2018? Court filings vs NCRB data

Section 498A records in the eCourtsIndia index by filing year, read on 23 September 2026. District-court rows track police-FIR volume more closely than High Court rows. The 2018 High Court figure is a spike in this index. District filings did not rise that year.

Year	All courts	District courts	High Courts	NCRB 498A cases registered	Note
2015	1,08,670	1,01,908	6,684	n/a
2016	1,25,197	1,18,193	6,934	n/a
2017	1,40,411	1,34,147	6,198	n/a	Rajesh Sharma screening directions
2018	1,42,685	1,30,970	11,624	1,03,272	HC index up sharply; district filings slightly down
2019	1,64,249	1,53,742	10,375	1,25,298	NCRB and district filings both up
2020	1,16,244	1,09,276	6,801	n/a	Pandemic year
2021	1,49,129	1,40,652	8,315	n/a	Recovery
2022	1,77,299	1,67,431	9,702	n/a	Peak year in this index
2023	1,73,846	1,64,538	9,099	1,33,676	Sustained high
2024	1,46,155	1,41,970	3,965	1,20,227 (IPC 498A + BNS 85)	BNS s.85 replaces 498A for offences from 1 July; this query undercounts new cases; indexing also lagging
2025	69,809	68,156	1,614	n/a	Most new cases cite BNS s.85; not comparable with earlier years

The all-courts series does not show a jump in 2018. District-court filings fell slightly that year (1,34,147 to 1,30,970) while High Court filings nearly doubled (6,198 to 11,624). NCRB registrations rose about 21 percent in 2019, and district filings rose about 17 percent the same year. If Social Action Forum changed filing behaviour, the data places that change in 2019, not in a 2018 court spike, and Arnesh Kumar, an arrest-procedure judgment, does not explain a 2018 surge in filings either.

NCRB counted 1,33,676 cruelty cases in 2023 and 1,20,227 in 2024. The 2024 figure spans both codes, because the BNS took effect midway through that year.

The police side of the story now has its own dataset. eCourtsIndia Crime Reports holds 12 lakh+ FIR PDFs from 13 states and union territories. These are collected records, not every FIR registered. A researcher can follow a 498A or BNS 85 FIR from the police station to the court record. Here is how to check the status of an FIR online.

How does a 498A case overlap with DV, maintenance and divorce cases?

A 498A complaint is rarely the only proceeding between the parties. The 21,582 records where 498A and “maintenance” appear together are mostly High Court order text, not a census of parallel filings, but they point to the usual bundle. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 gives the wife civil remedies against the husband and his relatives, including monetary relief, residence orders and protection orders. Section 125 of the CrPC, now Section 144 BNSS, gives a right to maintenance independent of any criminal complaint. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 governs divorce, custody and interim maintenance under Section 24.

These proceedings often run together. In the criminal case, the accused may also file quashing or transfer petitions and applications about stridhan (the woman’s own property). For the district-court divorce and DV series, see File DV, Get Divorce.

What this means for litigants and lawyers

First, for 498A matters that reach the High Court, settlement followed by a quashing petition under Section 528 BNSS (formerly Section 482 CrPC) is the most common closing route visible in the order text we indexed. Whether it suits a particular case is a question for an advocate. Kerala, Patna and Karnataka have the highest disposed shares in this index. Allahabad’s 77.3% disposal rate means roughly three in four of its 498A matters have reached a final order.

Second, do not read “11,821 records mention conviction” as a conviction rate. It is a word count, mostly from High Court orders, and it includes appeals that set convictions aside. The trial happens in the magistrate court. The parallel maintenance, stridhan and divorce proceedings run on a separate civil track.

Third, anyone debating whether 498A is overused or essential should start with the district pendency figure (36.4%) and the NCRB FIR series, not with a High Court quash-word count. Patna outranks Allahabad on volume, and the rest of the High Courts together far exceed either. To see how a particular judge has handled these matters, open their public case list on the eCourtsIndia judge pages, or read how to research a judge’s case patterns.

To keep a matter on your radar, you can track it on eCourtsIndia for ₹5 a month, with WhatsApp and email alerts at ₹0.50 per alert per channel (September 2026, see current prices). Here is how to set up hearing alerts.

A note on sensitivity

This post reports court-index data and nothing more. It takes no position on whether Section 498A is overused, misused or essential. Reasonable lawyers, judges and researchers disagree, and the data above does not settle that question. What the data does show is that the settlement-and-quash pathway is the dominant High Court closure route in 498A litigation, that most indexed 498A records are district-court files with a 36.4% pendency burden, and that a 2018 bump in High Court filings is not the same thing as a 2018 surge in police FIRs.

Methodology and limitations

• Dataset: court records in eCourtsIndia’s index of public eCourts data (district courts, High Courts, the Supreme Court and tribunals) where “498A” appears anywhere in the searchable record: CNR, parties, advocates, judges, act-and-section text, case type, AI keywords, AI order summaries or order text.
• Sample: all matching records, 18,43,705 on 23 September 2026. The unit is a court record (one CNR each), not an FIR or a person. One FIR can create several court records (bail, trial, revision, quashing). We did not de-duplicate by FIR.
• Date range: filing years 2015 to 2025 for the trend table; all years for the totals.
• Data as of: read on 23 September 2026 through the eCourtsIndia API/MCP search_cases tool with facets switched on. NCRB comparison figures: Crime in India 2018, 2019, 2023 and 2024.
• Definitions: “pending” and “disposed” are the status labels the source courts publish, read on 23 September 2026; Supreme Court labels (admitted, allowed, dismissed and similar) are shown separately. Case types are each court’s own labels. A keyword pair means both words appear anywhere in the record, which measures order text, not outcomes.
• Limitations: covers only courts that publish on eCourts. Magistrate records often have no searchable order text. Offences from 1 July 2024 are charged under Section 85 BNS, so a “498A” search undercounts them. Keyword matches include eCourtsIndia’s AI-generated keywords and summaries, which may add terms not in the order. State counts reflect labelling and indexing, not crime rates. Records can lag the court’s own register. The website search box may show a different total from the API count used here.
• Reproduce it: with an eCourtsIndia API key, the MCP call for the headline figure is search_cases(query="498A", pageSize=1) with facets="caseStatus,filingYear,stateCode", plus courtLevels="DC", "HC" or "SC" to split by court level and cc="BRHC01" and similar for a single court. Keyword variants such as search_cases(query="498A quash") require both words anywhere in the same record. The search also accepts phrase quotes, AND, OR, NOT, grouping and a trailing wildcard. Keep facets switched on: a results-only call can report an approximate total for very large result sets.

The dashboard pattern from our Section 138 tracking guide applies here too, and How to use the eCourtsIndia API is the quickstart. The same method sized the cheque bounce caseload in Cheque Bounce in India and the PMLA bail caseload in PMLA Bail After Vijay Madanlal Choudhary.

eCourtsIndia is a private platform, not the Government’s eCourts portal (ecourts.gov.in). Being named in a court record does not mean a person or company did anything wrong. Spotted an error? Write to support@ecourtsindia.com.

Eighteen lakh forty-three thousand records mentioning Section 498A sat in the eCourtsIndia index on 23 September 2026. About a third were pending, almost all of them in district courts. The High Court quash-and-settle pathway is real, and it is not the whole caseload.

Further reading: File DV, Get Divorce, Supreme Court divorce and alimony judgments, From RTI to API: A Law Student’s Starter Kit for Empirical Court Research, and the Bank Litigation Index and Conglomerate Litigation Map in this data series.

Frequently Asked Questions

Sources

• India Code (Government of India): Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Checked 28 September 2026.
• IndiaCode by eCourtsIndia: Section 85, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in force from 1 July 2024; text, cognizability condition, non-bailable). Checked 28 September 2026.
• IndiaCode by eCourtsIndia: Section 86, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (cruelty defined). Checked 28 September 2026.
• IndiaCode by eCourtsIndia: Section 358, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (repeal of the IPC and savings). Checked 28 September 2026.
• Supreme Court of India: Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 443 (14 September 2018; also quotes the 1983 Statement of Objects and Reasons, Sushil Kumar Sharma and the Rajesh Sharma citation). Checked 28 September 2026.
• Supreme Court of India: Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 (2 July 2014; NCRB 2012 figures on 498A). Checked 28 September 2026.
• LiveLaw: report of Shivangi Bansal v. Sahib Bansal, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 735 (22 July 2025). Checked 28 September 2026.
• eCourtsIndia case record: Janshruti (People’s Voice) v. Union of India, W.P. (C) 315 of 2025 (15 April 2025). Checked 28 September 2026.
• eCourtsIndia case record: Wasim v. State (NCT of Delhi), Criminal Appeal 1061 of 2019 (18 July 2019). Checked 28 September 2026.
• National Crime Records Bureau: Crime in India reports. Checked 28 September 2026.
• ThePrint: NCRB Crime in India 2024, cruelty by husband or his relatives 1,20,227 cases (7 May 2026). Checked 28 September 2026.
• Business Standard: NCRB Crime in India 2023, cruelty by husband or relatives 1,33,676 cases (30 September 2025). Checked 28 September 2026.
• eCourtsIndia: Pricing (case tracking, per-channel alerts). Checked 28 September 2026.

eCourtsIndia queries used (read 23 September 2026)

• Headline 498A search: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A
• 498A quash: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A+quash
• 498A mediation: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A+mediation
• 498A compromise: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A+compromise
• 498A conviction: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A+conviction
• 498A acquittal: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A+acquittal
• 498A maintenance: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A+maintenance
• Patna HC 498A records: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A&cc=BRHC01
• Allahabad HC 498A records: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A&cc=UPHC01
• Kerala HC 498A records: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A&cc=KLHC01
• Karnataka HC 498A records: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A&cc=KAHC01
• Bombay HC 498A records: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A&cc=HCBM01
• Delhi HC 498A records: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A&cc=DLHC01
• Supreme Court 498A records: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=498A&cc=SCIN01
• Section 125 CrPC search: https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=Section+125+CrPC
• BNSS Section 528 (inherent powers): https://ecourtsindia.com/search?q=Section+528+BNSS