Cruelty After Marriage Robs Women Of Dignity, Fight Against Domestic Violence Far From Over: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that cruelty in the matrimonial homes robs women of their dignity, underscoring that fight against social evils like dowry and domestic violence is far “from over.”

“It is profoundly unfortunate that, even in present times, many women continue to suffer cruelty within their matrimonial homes, inter alia, for demand of dowry. Such cruelty not only robs women of their dignity but, in many tragic cases, also costs them their lives. These incidents are a stark reminder that the fight against social evils like dowry and domestic violence is far from over,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.

The Court made the observations while denying anticipatory bail to a father and in law and brother in law of a woman who committed suicide in her parental home allegedly due to persistent dowry demands and cruelty at the hands of her husband, in-laws and other relatives.

No suicide note was recovered. The statements of the deceased's family members were recorded. It was alleged that the deceased's husband, along with his parents, brothers and their wives, had been continuously demanding articles and had subjected her to beatings and torture whenever the demands were not met.

It was alleged that the deceased was thrown out of the matrimonial home with a warning that she would be allowed to return only when her family fulfilled the demand of a Scorpio car. They also claimed that her mobile phone had also been withheld by the in-laws.

While denying anticipatory bail to the deceased's father in law and brother in law, the Court granted the relief to the sister in law. While doing so, Justice Sharma carefully took note of the statements given by the deceased's family members.

The Court said that the deceased's conversation with her mother prima facie demonstrated that she had been subjected to severe cruelty and harassment in close proximity to the time of her death.

It was contented that the father-in-law resided on the ground floor of the house, while the brother-in-law resided on the second floor and the deceased was living with her husband on the third floor.

On this, the Court observed that the mere fact that they were residing on different floors of the same house does not imply that they were not in contact with the deceased or that they could not have subjected her to cruelty.

“Evidently, the entire family was living in one house, though on separate floors, and thus, on this ground alone, the allegations against them cannot be considered as improbable or false,” the Court said.

“This Court also takes into account the fact that despite several notices having been served upon the applicants herein, they have not joined the investigation yet. Further, as informed by the learned APP for the State on instructions from I.O., their mobile phones have been found to be switched off,” it added.

Title: RAHUL SAHNI v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Click here to read order