NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday in its order rejected a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by an NGO, seeking balanced protection for all parties in matrimonial cases, including mandatory preliminary probe before filing of domestic violence (DV) cases against false complaints.
A two-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Surya Kant and also comprising Justice N Kotiswar Singh, refused to entertain the PIL, filed by NGO Janshruti (People's Voice).
Before rejecting the PIL, Justice Kant orally observed that we understand that it's a spicy news item (for the petitioner) that Section 498-A (Cruelty inflicted on a married woman by her husband or his relatives) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was being misused. "You (asking the petitioner's lawyer) tell me where are the instances of misuse?", Justice Kant orally remarked.
The bench of the top court said, "We see no reason to interfere with the legislative policy behind Section 498-A of the IPC. The allegation (by the petitioner) that the provision is being misused is vague and evasive, as no opinion is given with respect can be formed while exercising jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution. Suffice it to observe that such an allegation can be examined on case-to-case basis."
When the petitioner's lawyer, pleaded that some provisions, including that of Section 498A IPC, were being allegedly misused by women, the court warned that such sweeping statement can't be made.
The PIL sought framing of guidelines for grant of maintenance and declaration of Sections 125-128 CrPC, Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, and related provisions in the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 as gender-neutral.
The petitioner also sought a direction for the amendment of Section 498A IPC to ensure balanced protection for all individuals involved in matrimonial disputes.
The petitioner, however, insisted and requested the SC to pass some direction on the ground that in India, domestic violence cases can be filed only by women, while in other countries, anybody can file such cases.
Hearing this, the top court, remarked, and criticized his submissions and said, "Why should we follow other countries? They should follow our country!".