The modern thinking Indian

It is not the case that the country is safe for woman. India is notorious for the bad condition of its woman. The problems are many - the country is highly patriarchal, woman's rights are more in theory, education for woman does not follow the same sense of rights as that for men, violence in the household is at an uncomfortable level for woman. Over the years, there has been a sustained push for ensuring that woman get more rights and a concept of equality in the household - this has been done through education and through laws that are aimed at protection for woman.
And this is where some of the problems are coming up. The laws are meant to ensure that woman can use the force of these laws to protect themselves - so for example, anti-dowry laws were meant to punish those members of the groom's family and the groom who demanded dowry for the marriage. Similarly, the laws for domestic protection were meant to protect women who were living in a household where they were being tormented, and the punishments and police investigation against the accused would bring back the confidence that the woman would have lost because of the harassment that they were facing.
However, like the anti-dowry law, where there are many examples of it being wrongly used, the same is getting true for the domestic violence laws, Consider the case of a woman who is in a dispute with her husband, and has either been advised or has figured out on her own that the use of these laws would ensure that her husband's family and him would come under tremendous pressure, maybe even jailed for some time, and hence would quickly come to an agreement with her. The disincentive for filing a false case did not exist and hence there was no problem is using these cases.
As a result of some of these false cases, courts are much more sensitive, and indeed, even the Supreme Court has been forced to provide some sort of safeguards before the law could act. Now, it would seem that courts are having to come into action for false cases under the domestic violence act (and because the Government of the day does not seem to have any mind to provide some of these safeguards for these laws). In this case, the court has applied a fine on the woman who had filed the case (link to article):

A court here has dismissed a woman's complaint of domestic violence against her husband and in-laws, noting that she misused legal provisions as a tool to extort unjustified money from him for unjustified personal gain, and imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on her. Metropolitan magistrate Shivani Chauhan dismissed the complaint of the woman, a south Delhi resident, saying that she had falsified and concocted various allegations and suppressed important facts in order to harass her in-laws.

Typically, divorce cases in India take a long time to settle; at the same time, as a reaction over the years to the country's social environment being strongly patriarchal, in favor of men, the laws that have evolved over the years to handle problems related to divorce and the economic needs of women who have separated from their husbands are more in favor of women. Women in divorce cases, or even in the case of separation are entitled to maintenance from their husbands. The man in such cases is also expected to pay for the expenses of growing up of children from such a marriage,
Now, this is perfectly fine. When you are in a marriage and are parents, there are some responsibilities and there are some duties both as a father and husband that have to be incurred. This is even more so in the case of a significant portion of Indian households where the wife is a housewife and the husband was the one who is working, and hence most of the assets and the income is in the name of the husband. But there are problems in this arrangement as well. The law and the judiciary do not seem to recognize some problems in this scenario - especially where the wife is capable of earning as well as the husband, or where she has a lot of assets. The law tends to be a bit blind in this area, and can be seen as not balanced. The argument is that women typically tend to be weaker economically and hence the reason for the bias in law, but weaker women would not suffer if the law took an equal position, and if the wife is capable of getting a good salary or already is rich / well-off and the husband equal or in a lower financial position, then it does not make sense to still award an alimony to her (in fact, all things being equal, as per an equal basis, the husband should be getting alimony). In this case (if it does not get over-turned on appeal), the court has given a ruling in favor of the husband and could be used as a precedent for cases such as these (link to article):

The Bombay high court has ruled that a woman is not entitled to claim maintenance in divorce cases if she is wealthy herself and is able to maintain her lifestyle despite the estrangement. The recent judgment was awarded by a division bench comprising justice AK Menon and justice AS Oka, while rejecting an application filed by a resident of Nariman Point, seeking enhancement of the alimony granted to her by a family court. The high court ruled that even after her divorce, there was no visible change in the woman’s lifestyle and she “continued to go on regular holidays abroad.” The division bench said this made her “ineligible for seeking any alimony, let alone an enhancement.” However, the bench decided not to interfere with the family court’s decision of awarding her the alimony of Rs25,000 each month.