“Nobody is above the law in this country,” the court declared, emphasizing that the law applies to everyone equally, irrespective of their status or occupation.
NEW DELHI: On Thursday (30th Jan), the Supreme Court of India made it clear that no one is above the law, regardless of their position. The case was brought before the bench consisting of Justices B R Gavai, Augustine George Masih, and K Vinod Chandran.
The dispute arose after the man’s lawyer expressed concerns that his client might suffer due to his wife’s position as an IPS officer.
ALSO READ: [IAS vs IPS]| Supreme Court Urges Settlement Between IAS and IPS Officers
During the proceedings, the man’s counsel raised an apprehension that his client would face continuous problems because his wife held a prestigious job in the Indian Police Service. In response, the bench made a stern remark.
“Nobody is above the law in this country,” the court declared, emphasizing that the law applies to everyone equally, irrespective of their status or occupation.
The bench then urged both parties to try and resolve their issues outside the court, keeping the interest of justice in mind.
The judges remarked, “She is an IPS officer. You are a businessman. Rather than wasting your time in the court, you should settle it. We are here to protect you if there is any victimisation.”
This comment suggested that the focus should be on finding a peaceful resolution instead of prolonging the legal battle.
The lawyer for the man alleged that his client and his father were arrested due to cases filed by the woman. The lawyer also claimed that the estranged wife had made a false declaration during her application process to join the police service, stating that no FIR (First Information Report) had been filed against her. However, it was pointed out that she faced two FIRs on the very same day she filled out her application form.
ALSO READ: Paazee Forex Extortion Case| Madras High Court Discharges IPS Officer Pramod Kumar
The bench responded sharply, questioning the motivations behind the man’s lawyer’s actions. “You are more interested in ensuring that she loses her job,” the judges said, implying that the lawyer’s goal was not to resolve the issue but to harm the woman’s career.
The lawyer responded by stating that it was the responsibility of the Home Ministry to investigate any potential false declarations made by the woman during her police recruitment.
To this, the bench pointed out, “You are not interested in saving your life. You are interested in ensuring that her career goes. Ultimately, in the process of ruining her life, you will also ruin your life.” The court observed that the man seemed less concerned about his own well-being and more focused on seeking revenge, which was clearly not in his best interest.
The bench further emphasized that the man’s real intention was evident: “It is more than clear to us” that he was not seeking a happy resolution or reconciliation but was only interested in making the woman’s life more difficult. The court made it clear that if both parties were unwilling to settle, it could not force them to do so, but it encouraged them to try and find a solution outside the courtroom.
“If you have any apprehensions, we will take care of that in our order,” the bench reassured, offering to include any necessary protections in their final decision.
The parties agreed to attempt to find an amicable settlement, with the lawyers on both sides stating that they would meet and try to resolve the matter. The court adjourned the case for a hearing after two weeks.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to IAF Officer in Matrimonial Site Rape Case
This dispute also involved a plea filed by the woman, challenging a verdict from the Allahabad High Court in June 2022. The high court had discharged the man’s parents in a criminal case filed by the woman.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
