More Coverage
Twitter Coverage
Satyaagrah
Written on
Satyaagrah
Written on
Satyaagrah
Written on
Satyaagrah
Written on
Satyaagrah
Written on
JOIN SATYAAGRAH SOCIAL MEDIA
"At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst": Justice P Velmurugan, Madras HC observed that "Evidence of woman's relatives in matrimonial dispute can't be brushed aside terming them interested witnesses"

The Madras High Court recently observed that evidence adduced by victim-woman's relatives in matrimonial disputes cannot be brushed aside by terming them as interested witnesses [P Senthil v State].
|
Single-judge Justice P Velmurugan said that in matrimonial disputes, it is usually the family members who would know about incidents which happen within the four walls of the house.
Moreover, such family members would usually refrain from unnecessarily giving out information about family disputes especially between the husband and wife in the court, even if they know about the incidents, the Court said.
"In the matrimonial disputes, only the family members can notice the incidents, which occurred in the home i.e. within the four wall and they can only come forward to give evidence and the third party, even if they also know, will not be ready to give evidence and they would think that it is a family dispute and the husband and wife will quarrel each other today and tomorrow would join together why should they poke their nose unnecessarily in the family dispute especially between the husband and wife," the judgment stated.
In the present case, the Court observed that the relatives (witnesses) had clearly spoken about the cruelty caused by the husband against the woman (wife) and, therefore, their evidence could not be simply brushed aside contending that they are interested witnesses.
The Court, therefore, upheld the appellant-husband's conviction for cruelty awarded by the trial court.
|
The case arose after a complaint was filed by the victim-wife against her husband and his family for cruelty with other offenses under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The trial judge after taking into consideration arguments advanced on either side, by a judgment dated December 16, 2019, acquitted all the accused and convicted the appellant-husband only for the offence of cruelty under Section 498A of IPC.
The trial judge sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of ₹5,000 and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three months.
The husband moved the High Court in an appeal against the said judgment of conviction.
The counsel for the appellant contended that the trial judge convicted him solely on the basis of evidence adduced by prosecution witnesses.
It was argued that the prosecution witnesses were interested parties and hearsay witnesses, whose testimony cannot be relied upon by the trial court for convicting the appellant for the offence under Section 498A.
It was also pointed out there was a delay of nearly 20 days in lodging the complaint since the day when the alleged cruelty was meted out to the complainant-wife.
The single-judge refused to entertain the contentions put forth by the appellant and noted that a delay of 20 days in lodging the complaint could not be a reason to acquit the appellant since it was natural for a newly married woman to take time to disclose about the cruelty to others.
A newly married woman would not rush to the police station to lodge complaints and her parents too would only attempt to settle the dispute at the first instance, the Court added.
The judge further noted that the wife had categorically stated about the incidents and her relatives had also corroborated the same therefore there was cogent evidence on the commission of offence under Section 498A.
"In the result, the criminal appeal stands dismissed as devoid of merit and substance. The trial Court is directed to secure the appellant to undergo remaining period of sentence if any," the court observed.
Being an appellate Court, it is important to reappreciate the entire evidence independently and give the finding, Court said.
"Accordingly this Court, being an appellate Court, while re-visiting the entire evidence found the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 498A of IPC and there is no sound reason or ground to interfere with the judgment of conviction made by the trial Court," court held
Appellant was represented by Advocate K Balakrishnan while prosecution was represented by advocate S Sugendran.
References:
Support Us
Satyagraha was born from the heart of our land, with an undying aim to unveil the true essence of Bharat. It seeks to illuminate the hidden tales of our valiant freedom fighters and the rich chronicles that haven't yet sung their complete melody in the mainstream.
While platforms like NDTV and 'The Wire' effortlessly garner funds under the banner of safeguarding democracy, we at Satyagraha walk a different path. Our strength and resonance come from you. In this journey to weave a stronger Bharat, every little contribution amplifies our voice. Let's come together, contribute as you can, and champion the true spirit of our nation.
![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
ICICI Bank of Satyaagrah | Razorpay Bank of Satyaagrah | PayPal Bank of Satyaagrah - For International Payments |
If all above doesn't work, then try the LINK below:
Please share the article on other platforms
DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text. The website also frequently uses non-commercial images for representational purposes only in line with the article. We are not responsible for the authenticity of such images. If some images have a copyright issue, we request the person/entity to contact us at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. and we will take the necessary actions to resolve the issue.
Related Articles
- ‘HRCE Department is bound to protect temple properties and their belongings’: Madras HC lashes out at Tamil Nadu govt, orders to initiate proceedings to recover the encroached temple land, warns strong action
- Writ petition of Irfan scrapped by Allahabad High Court of seeking permission for Azaan on loudspeakers in the mosque, says ‘not a fundamental right’: Read details of the case
- “Just a reminder that I’m going on vacation and you’re not”: Plea before Bombay High Court challenges long court vacations; claims such vacations violate fundamental rights of citizens since litigants' right to seek justice is affected by such vacations
- Controversial Marxist leader Brinda Karat reaches Jahangirpuri to implement Supreme Court order, fanatic Leftist journos outrage over order not being followed immediately and took to Twitter to attack NDMC officials
- Uphaar Cinema fire was one of the worst fire tragedies in recent Indian history: Association of Victims of Uphaar Fire Tragedy (AVUT) filed a landmark case considered a breakthrough in civil compensation law in India
- "चलो फिर से": Baba Ramdev claims "crores of people are dying" from toxic modern medicines, comparing their deadly impact to British rule, Islamic invasions, and revolutions by Lenin, Marx, and Mao, despite Supreme Court warnings against fearmongering
- "There is difference between blasphemy and expressing religious opinions based on one’s knowledge of the subject": Historic decision by Madras High Court from 2019
- Only Dhimmis can be a good Hindu – An article on Shekhar Gupta’s ThePrint argues ‘defending namaz’
- Shivling discovered in the Gyanvapi complex during a survey after the water was pumped out of a well that Muslims were using as 'Wuzukhana' for washing their hands and feet before offering Namaz
- 'Every sinner has a future': Bombay HC suspends Nijam Asgar Hashmi's life sentence, convicted for beheading Umesh Ingale, his girlfriend’s cousin; questions evidence led by Hashmi, who invited Ingale for "sheer khurma" on Eid just to get rid of him
- Why Hindus not claiming their temples back from the Government control: Is pro-Hindu govt will always be in power
- "गजवा ए हिंद vision 2047": Delhi HC denies bail to ex-PFI chief E Abubacker, highlighting PFI's Vision 2047 to overthrow the government, replace the constitution with Sharia Law, and establish a Caliphate by 2047 through terror camps & radicalizing youth
- “If you’re good enough to hit the gym at 70, why not a courtroom?”: Age of retirement of Supreme Court and High Court Judges needs to be increased in sync with increase in the longevity and advancement in medical sciences, Parliamentary Committee
- "Ram Lalla Virajman": Meet K Parasaran, the 'Pitamah' of Indian laws, whose dedication to the Ram Janmabhoomi case was a profound dream, his unparalleled devotion saw him argue for hours barefoot, symbolizing his deep faith and commitment to justice
- "अंधा कानून": Kanhaiya Lal's brutal beheading by radical Islamists for supporting Nupur Sharma shocked Udaipur, and now, in a sorry state of justice, Mohammed Javed, who informed the killers, is granted bail, sparking outrage and fear across the nation