Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“A marriage is not an event for ‘song and dance’ and ‘wining and dining’ or an occasion to demand and exchange dowry and gifts by undue pressure leading to possible initiation of criminal proceedings thereafter. A marriage is not a commercial transaction.”
To attract the charge of Section 306 of the Penal Code, the prosecution must establish incitement, instigation, aiding, or abetment to commit suicide.
“The essence of gender-neutrality must permeate through every line of a judgment, and a judge must cultivate thoughts that are inherently gender-neutral.”
Marriage is a relationship which flourishes when nurtured with absolute trust and compassion but whittles down when sprinkled with accusations on character, fidelity and chastity of the spouse and becomes beyond redemption when the devastating effects of this one-sided barrage of accusations is topped with rejection of paternity and legitimacy of the innocent children, by their own father.
Making derogatory complaints against spouse demonstrate lack of mutual respect and goodwill, which is crucial for a healthy marriage and merely by stating that such complaints are made after parties had separated, in no manner absolves a spouse from the guilt of committing cruelty on the receiving end.
Regarding the timing of the FIR in relation to the divorce petition, the Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the pendency of a civil proceeding does not bar criminal proceedings.
The Family Judge has erred in analyzing the life of the parties by taking a myopic view and by considering each incident as an independent window, when in fact it is the journey of the parties through their matrimonial life, which is determinative of their compatibility, progressiveness, and growth.
When such is the nature of one spouse towards the other, it brings disgrace to the very essence of marriage and there exist no possible reason as to why he should be compelled to live while enduring the agony of living together.
The case under 498-A of the Penal Code, 1860 seems to be the outcome of a personal grudge and differences between both the parties.
A wife’s withdrawal from matrimonial relationship unilaterally without any reason thereby depriving husband of conjugal bliss, since October 2013 till date, can only be inferred as an act of cruelty.
“It is a collective duty of both husband and wife to wither the trivial issues which are normal in a matrimonial life and mutual respect to the decision of each other appears to be the hallmark of the society. Even the Constitution recognises equality in gender and, therefore, the husband to be put on higher degree than that of the wife is unacceptable.”
The allegations which assassinate the character of the spouse amounts to the highest level of cruelty, which no doubt shall shake the foundation of their marriage.
Unfortunate are the matrimonial disputes where the fountain head of friction inter se the spouses is mere lack of adjustment, understanding and the will to stay together. These factors are the wheels of the chariot of a workable marriage and if either spouse becomes averse to move together and chooses to abandon the relationship, then extensive reconciliatory efforts by one spouse, would also not yield any results.
“While human emotions know no bounds and rules, but definitely human sensibilities emanating from mind shall have prevailed for an educated person like appellant to have reigned his affections for third person, with scant regard for respondent who reposed complete faith by entering into vows of marriage.”
“To nurture the matrimonial bond, it is of high significance that parties live together and avoid leaving each other’s company frequently.”
Howsoever abysmal the differences maybe between the spouses, but in no realm can the act of the aggrieved spouse of igniting animosity and hostility in the minor child in an attempt to use the child as a weapon to get even with their spouse, could be justifiable.
The High Court cautioned that if consideration of such artificial deductions is allowed, then in every petition under Section 125 of CrPC there would be tendency by the husband to show lesser salary with an intention to mislead the Courts so as to avoid giving maintenance.
Supreme Court commented that “the criminal justice system of ours can itself be a punishment” as happened in the instant matter which started in 1993 and came to an end in 2024, after 30 years of suffering.
“It is vividly clear that when there are conflicting judgments of the Supreme Court of benches of equal strength, it is the earlier one which is to be followed by this Court.”
Madras High Court said that the wife was always ready and willing to live with the husband along with two children. It is the husband, who is running away from the matrimonial home without discharging his duty and responsibility as a husband.