Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Her behaviour, including instigating the daughter against the father, making unfounded demands during a financially unstable period, and leaving the home with the daughter while abandoning the son, demonstrated a pattern of mental harassment and disregard for the matrimonial bond.”
It is quite understandable that being the deceased’s father, he would have been highly traumatized due to untimely death of his daughter. However, it is quite evident from his first statement that no details of the alleged harassment of the daughter were mentioned.
“She did not use her sufferings for gain of sympathy, instead she channelled it inward, reflecting the Hindu ideal of the woman as Shakti – not weak, but submissive and powerful in her endurance and grace.”
Covering all the important family law cases across various High Courts and the Supreme Court as well as the legislative updates, this roundup provides a quick summary of cases, latest legal updates in family law and links to other roundups.
“Every dispute, quarrel or altercation arising from the matrimonial life are not criminal offence. It will take colour of Criminal law only when there are no alternatives for the wife but to put an end to her life, because of the harassment.”
“In cases of domestic violence, it is not prudent to look for independent corroboration for the evidence of a victim, particularly when the incidents of domestic violence including ill-treatments and harassments often occur within the confines of a house.”
“The wife was not seriously interested in reconciliation and there was no evidence indicating withdrawal of the husband from her society without reasonable cause and her claims of the husband demanding divorce during their cohabitation were not substantiated by cogent evidence.”
The Court was shocked with the treatment given to the girls in the children’s home and the complaints made in respect of the Child Welfare Committee, which was established with a broad object and was supposed to act in the children’s interest, who need care and protection.
“To prove the offence of dowry death, it must be shown that there was cruelty and harassment within 7 years of marriage and that it was meted out for or in connection with, demand for dowry”.
“The Court observed that the police does not take proper precautions and appropriate investigation when it came to offences under Section 498-A IPC and called their attitude of proceeding with investigation with presumptions/prejudicial mind, ‘dangerous’.”
Only out of ulterior motive to settle personal score, wife makes generalized and sweeping accusation unsupported by concrete evidence. As a result, the family members of husband have to face agony of criminal trial, when no prima facie case is made out against them.
“The wife may be willing to resume her marital life with the husband, but in view of the mental cruelty caused by her, the husband’s unwillingness for reunion is a justifiable one”
“It is not the job of any trained law enforcer, skilled in the efficient use of force continuum to mete out unmerciful, furious beatings to a common man on the drop of the hat and disrespect civilians, wielding their authority to disregard and disrupt law and order themselves.”
The petitioner-husband and Respondent 2-wife agreed to some conditions, including that the petitioner must hand over all documents and certificates belonging to Respondent 2, currently at his residence in India and in the USA, to Respondent 2.
Cruelty under Section 498-A IPC does not necessarily require proof of dowry demands; physical or mental cruelty alone is sufficient.
The term “cruelty” is subject to rather cruel misuse by the parties, and cannot be established simpliciter without specific instances, to say the least. The tendency of roping these sections, without mentioning any specific dates, time or incident, weakens the case of the prosecutions, and casts serious suspicion on the viability of the version of a Complainant.
The Court held that the petitioner was the alleged girlfriend of the complainant’s husband, and no other status or relation had been assigned to her for prosecution under Section 498A of the IPC.
The only reference to petitioners 3 and 4 is that, during visits to the accused No. 1 and third respondent’s home, they taunted her for not being able to conceive. Such vague allegations, without specific dates or details, cannot withstand legal scrutiny.
Even after assuming, that such relationship existed between petitioner and his sister-in-law, or demeaning language in reference to the deceased, was exchanged via WhatsApp between them, these facts, stand alone, do not, prima facie, disclose the specific ingredients of cruelty or harassment related to dowry demand.
The Court opined that impugned provisions do not warrant judicial interference, because it is well-settled law that courts refrain from intervening in matters of legislative policy or mandate