Introduction
The High Court of Punjab and Haryana (High Court) imposed fine on two women recently in two separate cases. Wives have settled the matrimonial disputes with their husbands wherein they also accepted permanent alimony after divorce. The dispute between the spouses got settled however, women refused to cooperate during quashing of criminal cases against their husbands.
Justice Sumeet Goel of the High Court stated, “Feeling of bitterness cannot be permitted to procrastinate the culmination of legal proceedings even when a settlement has been arrived at between the parties.”
Facts in brief (Two separate cases with similar facts)
The facts of both the cases were similar, wherein the accused (husband) had sought quashing of the First Information Reports (FIR) which was registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section 498A of the IPC deals with ‘cruelty’ by husband or relative of husband of a woman.
The Court was informed that the matrimonial dispute (in both the cases) between the parties was already amicably compromised. That the husband has already paid full and final settlement (permanent alimony) to the wife. However, she did not cooperate during quashing of the criminal proceeding.
In one of the cases, the wife did not appear before the Court on issuance of notice. In another case, the wife’s counsel alleged that the affidavit pertaining to the settlement between the parties was a forged document.
Observation of the High Court
Based on the above facts and circumstances, Justice Sumeet Goel of the High Court remarkably stated that feeling of bitterness of wives could not be permitted to procrastinate the culmination of legal proceedings. It added that such an act could not be entertained especially when there has been already a settlement between the parties.
The Court has correctly pointed out that in both the cases the wives have attained the benefit of compromise, they received full amount as permanent alimony that was settled between the parties, and divorce decrees have also been passed by the competent Courts. After all this, the wives were not cooperating in quashing of criminal proceedings against their husbands with a sole motive that is to harass them.
Regarding the allegation of forged documents which was brought up in the second case by the counsel of the wife. The High Court noted that it was a baseless allegation against the husband as no tangible evidence could be brought on record proving that the affidavit was forged. The affidavit clearly stated that the dispute was settled between the parties.
Further, no such contention was made by the wife during the divorce proceedings by mutual consent before the Family Court that the consent was given under fraud, coercion, or misrepresentation. Hence, the allegations against the husband were concocted and without any merits.
Decision of the High Court
Based on aforesaid noting, the High Court concluded that continuation of criminal proceeding by not quashing of the FIRs against the husbands would lead to abuse of the process of law.
The High Court stressed that under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) while the Court is empowered to exercise its inherent powers, it must do so vigilantly. It highlighted that the Court cannot ignore the ill intention or mala fide motive of a party to cause hindrance or misuse the process of law in Courts for their personal grudges.
These two cases were perfect examples of misuse of law by wives to harass their husbands by not cooperating in quashing of criminal proceedings against them.
In two separate cases in its orders dated 1st May and 15th May 2024, the High Court imposed hefty cost of Rs. 40,000 and Rs. 25,000 (respectively) on the women who for their personal bitterness did not cooperate in the quashing of criminal proceedings.
Similar case in which fine imposed on wife
The High Court also imposed a fine of Rs. 50,000 last month on a wife for purposefully failing to record her statement before the Magistrate. In that case also, the parties had amicably settled the matrimonial dispute wherein she received permanent alimony from her husband and a divorce decree was passed by the Family Court. However, the wife chose not to appear to record her husband with an ill motive i.e. to harass her husband and not cooperating in quashing of criminal proceedings against him.
The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the husband and imposed a fine on wife for misusing the process of law.
Conclusion
The approach of the Courts is changing rapidly and they are not following the biased approach anymore that in a matrimonial dispute a wife is always correct. Such decisions of the High Courts are welcoming as it follows a balanced view that no one is above law and the one who will attempt to misuse it shall be punished or fined.
Such decisions of the High Court will discourage malafide litigants who for their bitterness uses law, state machinery (police) and Courts to take revenge. The Courts have clarified that no lenient approach would be adopted against those who uses law for their personal vendetta.
Leave A Comment