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
- "We are all born gifted. That is our true inheritance": Supreme Court observes that female tribal is entitled to parity with male tribal in intestate succession, says "Not to grant benefit of 'Survivorship to daughter in father's property' is bad Law"
- “Keep your pity because you’re going to need all your pity for what’s coming”: Central Government declared PFI a terror outfit of radical Islam, its associates or fronts as an unlawful association and ban them with immediate effect, for a period of 5 year
- In an unexpected turn, the Supreme Court acquits woman accused of killing her newborn; says High Court, trial court possibly didn't respect her right to privacy, it's enlightening to see how privacy might now overshadow the scales of justice, isn't it?
- Calcutta High Court's landmark judgment illuminates the secular essence of Durga Puja, reinforcing citizens' constitutional rights and India's unity in diversity, a celebration beyond religion, it embodies vibrant spirit of communal harmony & tradition
- Hindu side filed reply in Supreme Court: 'Gyanvapi property belonged to Lord Adi Vishweshwar since time immemorial, even before the Islamic rule in India, and hence cannot be handed to anybody'
- "ATM is now Closed": Puneet Khurana, co-founder of For God's Cake & Woodbox Cafe, died by suicide, blaiming harassment by wife Manika Pahwa & in-laws over ₹10L demands, ₹2Cr property disputes, ₹70K/month legal fees, and domestic abuse
- Does the Places of Worship Act 1991, really forbids any transformation in worship’s religious character after August 15, 1947? Gyanvapi compound may lead to its exemption if found more than 100 years old
- "As per Article 195 from the book ‘Principles of Mohammedan Law’ by Sir Dinshah Fardunji Mulla, Muslim girl above 16 is competent to marry any person of choice": Punjab and Haryana HC cites Sharia to justify child marriage
- "The miracle isn't that I finished. The miracle is that I had the courage to start": 49th Chief Justice of India, Uday Umesh Lalit's short tenure is a race against time with big plans lined up, he intends to meet head-on the challenges confronting SC
- “Man cannot be freed by the same injustice that enslaved it”: Supreme Court stays Uttarakhand High Court order on Haldwani eviction, and disapproved the manner in which eviction was sought to be carried out by the Indian Railways, urges rehabilitation
- "No neutrality, there is only greater or lesser awareness of one's bias": Joshimath Sinking - Supreme Court refuses urgent hearing, "there are democratically elected institutions to look into issue & everything of urgency does not have to come to court"
- "Law is not law, if it violates principles of eternal justice": Justice DY Chandrachud is set to become India’s 50th CJI, a judge known for his often liberal and dissenting views has been part of some landmark verdicts of Ayodhya, Section 377 & Sabrimala
- "Judge saheb ko bura laga kya… nahi, bas yunhi pooch riya hun": CJI Ramana slams Indian media amid the backlash judiciary is facing over controversial remarks and judgements, says ‘Media running agenda-driven debates and kangaroo courts’
- "Waqf Act is against secularism, unity, and integrity of the nation; Waqf is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution" says Ashwini Upadhyay: Filed PIL in Delhi HC challenging provisions of Waqf Act
- "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both": Delhi High Court upheld the freedom of speech privilege of the advocacy profession, Justice Mini Pushkarna even refused to look into irrelevance or maliciousness of the statement