Apex court comes to the rescue of husband’s kin

In a major relief to the in-laws of an estranged wife, who may be hell-bent upon ‘punishing’ all and sundry ‘relatives’ of her husband for whatever reasons, the Supreme Court of India has advised the courts to be careful in proceeding against them in crimes pertaining to matrimonial disputes and dowry deaths.

Delivering the verdict in K Subba Rao & Others Vs. State of Telangana & Others in Crl.A No. 1045 of 2018 the division bench of Justice S A Bobde and Justice L Nageswara Rao, in its Judgement delivered on August 21, said, “ ..The relatives of the husband should not be roped in on the basis of omnibus allegations unless specific instances of their involvement in the crime are made out. See Kans Raj v. State of Punjab 7 ors (2009)5 SCC 207 and Kailash Chandra Agrawal and Anr v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors 16 SCC 551.”

In the instant case, the ‘wife’ had filed a complaint alleging harassment by her husband and his family members including the maternal uncles of her husband. The allegation, inter alia, was that the uncles were supporting the husband who was physically and mentally torturing her and that they conspired together to kidnap the child from her custody and take him away to the USA. Nothing else indicating their involvement in the crime was mentioned.

The court did not find any substance in bald allegations against the relatives of the husband and termed the allegations as ‘omnibus’ and quashed the proceedings qua the Appellants initiated under Sections 498 A, 120 B,420 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code.

Time and again through these columns we have expressed our considered view that while the provisions of draconian legislations like Domestic Violence Act, Section 498 A of IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act should be cautiously enforced against ‘the husband and his relatives’ to punish the guilty, there is an urgent need to put a brake on the indiscriminate use of these provisions which result into ignominy and irreparable loss of social reputation to the presumably innocent family members of the husband.

The recent legal history has recorded a spate of bogus allegations and fanciful monetary claims from the husband and his relatives by the estranged wives which is nothing but crass misuse of the legal remedies.

It is, indeed, a matter of serious concern that the enforcement of such draconian laws has been solely entrusted to the police force. This power is often misused by the police at the lower wrung for personal gain. The half-hearted efforts made by the investigating teams of police has been recently decried even by the apex court. (Vide Suresh & Anr Vs. State of Haryana, Crl. A No.1446 of 2012).

Fortunately, the apex court in Crl.A 1265 of 2017 and earlier in Arnesh Kumar’s case had taken initiative to regulate the implementation of matrimonial laws and prescribed guidelines but subsequently these judgements have been once again put under the scanner by some lobbyists who are unhappy with such efforts.

Kulbhushan case
International Court of Justice (ICJ) is likely to resume hearing of the Kulbhushan Yadav’s case in February,2019. Yadav a death convict in Pakistan was arrested in March 2016 from Baluchistan province after he came from Iran on the charges of espionage. He was sentenced to death in April, 2017 by a military court following which India has taken the matter to ICJ.

While the new government of Pakistan headed by Imran Khan has apparently made some overtures towards normalisation of relations with India, it would be a good gesture on its part to release Kulbhushan Yadav and hand him over to India. Such a step would certainly pave the way for further initiatives towards normalisation of bilateral relations between the two neighbouring countries.

Such a gesture by Imran Khan would undoubtedly send a strong signal to the Moghuls in Pakistan’s defence forces and espionage outfits besides Islamic terrorists that the new government is not a puppet regime to dance to their tune.

HC chides eccentric litigant
In a rare episode, the Bombay High Court chastised an eccentric litigant for having filed several vexatious cases and claiming the physical possession of ‘C’ and ‘E’ municipal wards of Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation including the building of the High Court!

Justice G S Patel, while dismissing the Execution Application of the petitioner Sushma Samanta, who was represented by Sukumar Samanta, pro se, came down heavily on the petitioner for having approached the court with ‘preposterous’ demands and warned him that if in future it follows the same course, the contempt of court proceedings shall be initiated against him.

While dismissing the Execution Application, the court observed, “ Enough is enough. Samanta must be stopped once and for all. Samanta is not entitled to possession of one millimetre of property beyond the area and the Cadastral Survey numbers of the three properties mentioned in his decree and conveyance.”

Employee’s suspension
The Supreme Court has reiterated its stand in Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India (2005) 7 SCC 291 and B V Gopinath that suspension of an employee must necessarily be for a short duration.

Upholding the quashing of a Madras High Court judgement involving disciplinary proceeding and suspension of Pramod Kumar, IPS, the Inspector General of Police in Tamil Nadu the apex court held,“ There cannot be any dispute regarding the power or jurisdiction of the State government for continuing the first respondent under suspension pending criminal trial.

There is no doubt that the allegations made against the first respondent are serious in nature. However, the point is whether the continued suspension of the first respondent for a prolonged period is justified.” The court added, “ On the basis of the material on record, we are convinced that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the first respondent under suspension any longer and that his reinstatement would not be a threat to a fair trial.”

Indeed, the present judgement would go a long way in providing succour to thousands of ‘suspended’ employees whose trial has been pending before the disciplinary authorities and due to prolonged suspension these employees have become a wrack mentally, physically and socially.
The Courts should also consider another phenomenon which is relatively of recent period.

In order to skirt such judgements, some employers in public, private and semi-public sectors stage-manage the trial in the shortest period after putting the delinquent employee under suspension. These ‘dramas’ of inquiry are generally performed devoid of natural law of justice and against the set principles of conducting disciplinary enquiries.

Obviously, the inevitable happens on the ‘charged’ employee who is branded as an undisciplined person and he is thrown out of job lock, stock and barrel. The disgraced and punished employee has no courage to challenge the action of the employer as he can ill-afford to engage a lawyer. Thus, for his remaining life, such an employee lives in penury and disgracefulness.

Hence, there is an urgent need to undertake a survey of these dramas of fake disciplinary inquiries and their outcome in all segments of employment. The apex court may also suo motu take cognisance of this serious problem and order such a nation-wide survey.

New body for FBAT
The Federation of Bar Associations, Telangana State has elected the following office-bearers at its meeting held on August 25 in the Metropolitan Criminal courts,Hyderabad:

President: Anantha Reddy, Working President: V Balraj, General Secretary: G Chandrashekhar Reddy, Secretary : D Jagadishwar Rao, Executive Committee Members : K S Rahul, B Janakiramulu, G Vinod Kumar, G Viplav Reddy, K Shekhar Raju, K Srinivas Reddy, Brahmaiah, B Yogeshwar Rao, N Krishna,V Shri Ram Kumar, H Chakradhar and Jagan Mohan Goud.