Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court stayed the observations made by the trial court against the CBI and listed the matter for hearing on 16 March 2026.
“The capacity to earn and actual earning are distinct concepts, and as per settled law, mere capacity to earn cannot be a ground to deny maintenance. The real test is whether the wife is actually earning.”
“Criminal law is meant to protect genuine victims of crime, not to rewrite the history of a relationship that was voluntarily entered into, publicly acknowledged, and sustained over several years.”
“At the stage of consideration of interim maintenance, this Court is neither expected nor required to embark upon a detailed inquiry or conduct a mini trial to resolve such disputes conclusively.”
“When the dignity of any judicial officer is torn by way of use of filthy words proved beyond reasonable doubt, the law must act as the thread that would mend and restore it.”
The Court stated that the charge under Section 377 of IPC could not have been framed against the husband. A ‘consensual’ oral or anal intercourse between any two adults, in private, is not a criminal offence punishable under Section 377 of IPC.
The wife was previously employed as a guest teacher. However, owing to the compelling responsibilities of single-handedly raising the child coupled with the burden of long commuting hours, she had to discontinue her employment.
The accused, despite being fully aware of the age difference, actively pursued the relationship, gave assurances of marriage, and induced the victim to make financial and emotional commitments.
It is unfortunate that despite directions from Supreme Court and this Court, the trial has not yet concluded. This was unacceptable, considering that such directions were passed while disposing of the bail application, and the accused is in judicial custody for over 10 years. Such prolonged delay in compliance with judicial directions defeats the very purpose of directing expeditious trial.
Public transport, which is meant to ensure mobility and independence, instead became a site of fear and vulnerability for the victim, and any undue leniency to an accused caught at the spot, may embolden any future for perpetrators.
“The present judgment is only an attempt to put in place a mechanism to address delays caused by the non-appearance of legal aid counsels and to prevent the dismissal of cases involving individuals who are already vulnerable and seeking justice.”
“It is a stark reminder of an unfortunate reality frequently observed by courts, where acts of sexual assault against children were often committed by individuals who occupy positions of trust or confidence in the child’s life. Such relationships of familiarity and trust not only provide perpetrators access to the child but also magnify the betrayal and lasting impact of the crime.”
Men who are victims of violence at the hands of their wives often face unique difficulties, including societal disbelief and the stigma associated with being perceived as a victim. Such stereotypes perpetuate the erroneous belief that men cannot suffer violence in domestic relationships.
“To trivialize a case of murder on the ground that the accused and the victim, being husband and wife, had an altercation and therefore, the husband being drunk at the spur of the moment, had killed her, is not only unacceptable but also shocking.”
The husband’s contention that the present case is not a case where the wife is hospitalised due to cruelty or harassment committed upon her, is not only unmerited but also cross the threshold of having a mentality that in a serious Section 498-A IPC cases, the woman should have injuries and medical treatment record of a hospital.
‘As much as the Court may wish to intervene on behalf of a deserving candidate, it cannot overstep its jurisdiction by altering the established norms and benchmarks.’
‘The dual-language approach will help in preventing future instances of non-compliance due to language barriers and ensure that the rights and opportunities are accessible to all citizens, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds.’
By denying the opportunity for continuous education in a school run by the same society, a pitiable situation frequently arises where, due to the two different identification numbers assigned by the DoE to the school’s junior and senior wings, financial segregation of students is indirectly perpetuated.
The Delhi High Court opined that true justice, and the ends of justice would not be served by quashing the FIR without a trial, but by conducting a trial to fairly ascertain the real culprit, whether it be the accused or the complainant.
The Delhi High Court stated that a prima facie case of money laundering under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 was made against K. Kavitha based on the material placed on record.