New Delhi: Expressing concern over the tendencies to implicate husband’s relatives in matrimonial disputes through sweeping allegations of cruelty, the Delhi High Court Wednesday stressed the importance of timely support from a woman’s family when she speaks of violence in her marriage.
The court said the married woman’s concerns should not be brushed aside by her family with advice to adjust and that a daughter’s “return” to her parents should never be regarded as a matter of “shame” for them.
The High Court said the law must afford effective protection to a woman subjected to cruelty, while ensuring that the husband’s relatives are not made to face prosecution merely because of their relationship with him.
Justice Madhu Jain made the observations while discharging Mayank Singhvi, husband of late flight attendant Anissia Batra, of charges of cruelty and abetment of suicide in the 2018 suicide case.
The court also upheld a trial court’s decision to discharge Singhvi’s parents of the charges of cruelty and causing dowry death.
Anissia (39), who worked with a German airline, allegedly committed suicide in South Delhi’s Panchsheel Park July 13, 2018. Her parents alleged that her husband used to physically abuse her. Mayank had rushed her to a nearby hospital, where she was declared dead.
The High Court, in its judgment, said “This court also wishes to emphasise the importance of timely support from the parental family when a daughter speaks of violence or persistent mistreatment in her marriage”.
“Her concerns should not be brushed aside with advice to adjust, nor should a fear of social disapproval stand in the way of offering her a safe home. A daughter’s return to her parents should never be regarded as a matter of shame for them. Preserving a marriage cannot take precedence over her safety and dignity, and support should not have to await an irretrievable tragedy,” it said.
The court also expressed concern over the tendencies of implicating the husband’s relatives in matrimonial disputes through sweeping allegations of cruelty.
It said the anguish arising from a troubled marriage is understandable, but it cannot justify drawing the entire family into criminal proceedings without a specific role being attributed to the persons concerned.
“A criminal prosecution has consequences that extend beyond the courtroom, affecting reputation, livelihood and family life. The law must, therefore, afford effective protection to a woman subjected to cruelty, while ensuring that relatives are not made to face prosecution merely because of their relationship with the husband, and even the husbands should not be, without cause, penalised,” Justice Jain said.
While discharging the husband in the case, the court said the prosecution material did not disclose the essential ingredients of either offence.
It said matrimonial discord, harassment or a strained relationship, without a positive and intentional contribution cannot by itself constitute abetment of suicide.
The court observed that even where a deceased woman leaves a message attributing responsibility for her suicide to another person, such an attribution by itself does not establish the offence of abetment.
The court passed the verdict on three revision petitions filed by Anissia’s parents, Mayank and the State challenging a December 2019 order of a sessions court.
The sessions court had discharged Mayank of the dowry death charge but directed framing of charges against him for the offences of cruelty and abetment of suicide.
His parents R S Singhvi and Sushma Singhvi were discharged by the Sessions Court in the case.
The prosecution alleged that the victim was subjected to physical and mental cruelty, monetary demands and pressure concerning the sale proceeds of a flat jointly owned by her and her mother.
Anissia’s mother had alleged that her daughter’s husband and his parents repeatedly demanded money and that the matrimonial discord had escalated in the period preceding her death.
The court emphasised that every financial demand or transaction during marriage cannot be treated as dowry unless the necessary connection with the marriage emerges from the nature of the demand and surrounding circumstances.