The Supreme Court ruled that personal presence is unnecessary in Domestic Violence Act cases. It quashed a man’s extradition and passport impoundment, citing violations of natural justice and irretrievable marital breakdown.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has ruled that personal presence is not mandatory in cases filed under the Domestic Violence (DV) Act, as they are quasi-criminal in nature and do not lead to penal consequences unless there is a breach of a protection order under Section 31 of the Act.
A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Sandeep Mehta made this observation while quashing the impounding of a man’s passport and the initiation of extradition proceedings due to his non-appearance in a DV case filed by his wife.
The bench emphasized:
“There is no requirement for the personal presence of any party in the proceedings under the DV Act, because they are quasi-criminal in nature and do not entail any penal consequences except when there is a breach of a protection order, which is the only offence provided under Section 31 of the Act.”
The court ruled that impounding a passport without hearing the individual was a violation of natural justice and ex-facie illegal. The man had faced multiple legal cases filed by his wife soon after their marriage in 2018.
The Supreme Court overturned the Calcutta High Court’s January 25, 2023 judgment, which upheld a Howrah court’s order for extradition proceedings against the man due to his failure to appear in the DV Act case. The SC deemed this decision untenable and unsustainable.
Also Read: “Only 8 Have Applied For Citizenship Under CAA in Assam”: Assam CM Himanta Biswa Sarma
The court directed that his passport be released within one week.
The bench cited the Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978) case and the Rajesh Sharma vs. State of UP (2018) ruling. In the latter, the Supreme Court ruled that passports should not be routinely impounded, nor should Red Corner Notices be issued for individuals residing abroad in such cases.
The husband, a software engineer in the USA, had sought divorce, which the court granted. The wife, a research specialist in Kolkata, opposed the plea, but the court found that their relationship was strained from the beginning and had worsened over time.
Also Read: Delhi Police Files Chargesheet Against NewsClick for Alleged “Pro-China Propaganda”
“With so much time having passed, any marital love or affection that may have developed between the parties seems to have evanesced. This is a classic case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage,”
the bench ruled.
The court also noted that no child was born from the marriage, further supporting its decision to grant the divorce.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES