SC Judge said painfully , "498A has become a weapon of oppression to implicate an entire family. Not only all relatives of husband but his distant relatives living elsewhere are also dragged into such cases. It is possible that husband, mother in law and father in law could have tortured. But net of law is not so wide that you can drag into it even distant relatives of husband."
The case was strange.
Wife had filed cases against against all her in laws. 498A, Dowery Act etc.
The husband and in-laws rushed to High Court for relief.
They said that the complaint by wife is wholly false and entire case of wife should be cancelled.
On the very first date of hearing, the High Court dismissed their case by saying, that until evidence is taken in court, the complaint cannot be thrown out. However, High Court granted relief to them that they will not have to appear in criminal court on every date because there is no dispute about their identity.</b>
The wife was displeased with relief granted to her husband and in laws by High Court.
Wife challenged this order of High Court in Supreme Court, on the ground that High Court could not have granted any relief to Husband's relatives without first issuing notice to her and giving her opportunity of hearing.
The case came up before two judges of Supreme Court.
Presiding judge asked, "How does it help wife to drag her in laws in criminal court on every date of hearing?"
The wife had engaged an expensive senior advocate in Supreme Court. He kept arguing at length.
But the more judges heard the argument, the more it was evident that it was an ego issue.
Supreme Court dismissed case of wife.
(Since there is no detailed judgement, you may not get copy of this judgement. Please note that observations made by judges during course of hearing of any case are not judgements and cannot be cited as judgements in court below. But reasoning expressed by them can be argued in other cases also in any court. The judge hearing that case has freedom to give his own judgement on these arguments, if made before them.)
Haresh Raichura
1203 (Dated 14/2/13 11.40 am)
