Madras HC: Unfortunately, there is no provision like the Domestic Violence Act, to proceed against the wife by the husband.
This remark was made by Justice S Vaidyanathan at a hearing on a petition filed by a government veterinarian, Dr P Sasikumar, against his wife for pursuing criminal charges against him.
After hearing charges that a lady had filed a domestic violence case against her husband solely to "harass" him, the Madras High Court offered some intriguing observations about the Domestic Violence Act and marriage.
The lack of a laws to handle complaints concerning women in domestic relationships, akin to the Domestic Violence Act, is troubling, according to Justice S Vaidyanathan.
This remark was made by Justice S Vaidyanathan at a hearing on a petition filed by a government veterinarian, Dr P Sasikumar, against his wife for pursuing criminal charges against him.
The bench passed an order saying, "It appears that, the 2nd Respondent (woman-complainant/ wife of the petitioner) is unnecessarily harassing the Petitioner. Unfortunately, there is no provision like the Domestic Violence Act, to proceed against the wife by the husband.”
Sasikumar had applied for readmission to his workplace, from which he had been suspended from due to a domestic violence allegation submitted by his wife just four days before to the family court's decision of divorce.
The bench recognized the ill-intent of the wife and remarked, “Complaint has been given four days prior to grant of divorce by the Family Court, which itself clearly shows that the 2nd Respondent has anticipated divorce order and created unnecessary trouble to the Petitioner."
The court annulled the work suspension and ruled that the petitioner be restored in service at his workplace in the court ruling.
The court went on to say that a relevant legal forum will have to judge if the petitioner is guilty or not of the charges brought against him by the wife in her complaint.
The petitioner had previously filed a divorce petition with the Family Court in 2015, alleging cruelty and voluntary desertion by his wife, which had been accepted. The wife was said to have filed a domestic abuse complaint against the petitioner just four days before the judgement was handed down.
For breaking news and live news updates, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter and Instagram. Read more on Latest National News on The National Bulletin