Marriages 'Sacrosanct' In Hindus But Misuse Of Domestic Violence Act A Menace, Courts Must Encourage Settlement: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court recently while quashing a section 498A IPC case against a family observed that marital discords have now-a-days become a menace in the society and that because of the two persons fighting over petty issues, the concept of marriage, which is 'sacrosanct' for Hindus is suffering a setback. A division bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and Mahendra Nerlikar noted the 'trend' of women filing FIR against as many relatives of the husband as possible and said thus there is a need to look at matrimonial discord matters from a 'different' angle. "Needless to mention that considering the recent trend of filing first information reports against as many as persons from husband side, has become imperative to look the matters of matrimonial disputes from a different angle, and therefore, if the parties settle their disputes amicably in order to live peacefully, it is the duty of the Court to encourage such action by entertaining the prayer for quashing of the first information report, charge sheet or criminal proceedings," the judges said in the order passed on July 8. In their 19-page order, authored by Justice Nerlikar, the Court said, "Marital discord has now a days become menace in the society due to various factors. The parties who are fighting due to these marital discord are having several remedies in law. The small issue between the two are spoiling the entire life and the marriages which are sacrosanct in Hindus are at stake. Marriages are not merely a social contract, but, a spiritual union that binds two souls together. However, now a days these scared marriages receive set back in the above circumstances. The distress, disharmony and lack of adjustment amongst the persons lead to conflict."The judges further said that the laws meant for improving the marital relationships such as the Domestic Violence Act, the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act etc. are frequently misused by parties, resulting in multiplicity of litigation, that not only burdens the Court, but, also cause mental as well as physical harassment, endless conflict, financial loss and irreversible harm to children and other family members. "In such cases, the Court should support a respectful settlement to terminate all litigation between the parties while protecting their life and liberty, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India," the bench underscored. In the instant case, the judges noted that the parties have settled their disputes and have arrived at an amicable settlement to bury all their disputes and move ahead in their lives. "Therefore, in the situation wherein the matrimonial tie has been brought to an end by mutual consent and the parties are eager to move ahead in their respective life, and further if the prayer for quashing the criminal proceeding is not entertained, it would tantamount to causing injustice to them. Therefore, in order to do complete justice, by taking recourse to the above cited judgments, the prayer for quashing the proceedings can be considered," the judges opined. The judges noted that in the instant case, the complainant wife has filed an affidavit and gave her no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings that she initiated against her husband and in-laws. This compromise, the bench said was 'genuine' one. "Therefore, in our view instead of dragging the parties to the Court and by protecting their right to live happily for the betterment of their future, in our opinion the said action should be encouraged by quashing the proceedings in the interest of justice. Though Sections 498-A and 377 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are non- compoundable, to secure ends of justice the Court should hold that the provisions under Section 320 would not be a bar to exercise the power for quashing the first information report, charge sheet or subsequent criminal proceedings," the bench said.With these observations, the bench quashed the FIR lodged against the husband, his mother, and two sisters. Appearance:Advocate SP Sonwane appeared for the Applicants. Additional Public Prosecutor SM Ukey represented the State. Advocate JB Gandhi represented the Wife. Case Title: ARP vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Application 900 of 2025)Click Here To Read/Download Order

Marriages 'Sacrosanct' In Hindus But Misuse Of Domestic Violence Act A Menace, Courts Must Encourage Settlement: Bombay High Court

Narsi Benwal

Tags