New Delhi: The Delhi High Court, while refusing to grant anticipatory bail to a woman accused of burning her husband by pouring boiling water mixed with chilli powder, said the hallmark of fair and just justice delivery system is to remain gender-neutral and in case a woman causes such injuries, a special class cannot be created for her.
“The hallmark of fair and just justice delivery system is to remain gender-neutral while adjudicating cases of such nature as the present one. In case a woman causes such injuries, a special class cannot be created for her. Crimes involving the infliction of life-threatening bodily injuries must be dealt with firmly, irrespective of whether the perpetrator is a man or a woman since the life and dignity of every individual, regardless of gender, are equally precious,” Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said.
Accused woman poured boiling water mixed with red chilli powder on her husband while he was sleeping
The investigation in the case revealed that while the husband was sleeping, the accused woman poured boiling water mixed with red chilli powder on his face, neck, chest and eyes and thereafter, she had locked the room from outside to ensure that he will not receive any medical aid and had fled from the spot. She had also left their three-month-old daughter in the room itself and had had also taken her husband’s mobile phone along with her to ensure he is not able to contact anyone.
The husband told the police that he had discovered documentary proof that his wife has made many false complaints of rape against several persons and when he had confronted her on this, she had threatened him of dire consequences, before the incident in question. He further told the police that she was infuriated when he had told her that he had lodged a complaint against her with the police and she had threatened him He further said that had gone to sleep when the incident took place at 3:00 AM when he was fast asleep.
Accused woman sought leniency
The counsel representing the woman accused submitted that since the accused is a woman, and wife of the victim, who was being tortured by him, she should be treated with leniency and as a victim.
The High Court said that such argument bring forth gender biases, whether hidden, conscious, or unconscious, which are an undeniable reality and not a mere fiction of the mind and such biases – rooted in societal perceptions, cultural conditioning, or individual assumptions – often find their way into arguments advanced before the courts, where leniency is sought solely on the basis of the accused’s gender.
Injuries caused to the body cannot be categorized differently based on gender: High Court
“However, it is the duty of the judiciary to remain vigilant and ensure that decisions are not influenced by such biases where law or judicial precedents specifically do not so provide,” the High Court said and added, “The jurisprudence surrounding the grant of bail is guided by well-established principles, including the nature of injuries caused, the conduct of the accused, and the circumstances under which life-threatening injuries are inflicted. These principles, however, do not differentiate or lay down different rules for consideration, solely based on the gender of the victim or the accused. Further, the injuries caused to the body – whether of a man or a woman – cannot be categorized differently based on gender.”
Empowerment of one gender and protection to it cannot come at the cost of fairness towards another: High Court
While dealing with the argument made by women’s counsel, the court wondered that in case the roles were reversed, and had the husband poured boiling water mixed with chilli powder on his wife while she was asleep, would have locked her inside the room, after doing so, would have taken her phone and had fled away from the spot, leaving their infant child crying beside her, it would have been undoubtedly argued that no mercy should be shown to him.
The High Court further said that the notion that in marital relationships, only women suffer physical or mental cruelty without exception, may be contrary to the hard realities of life in many cases and courts cannot adjudicate the cases before them, on the basis of stereotypes.
“The empowerment of one gender and protection to it cannot come at the cost of fairness towards another. Just as women deserve protection from cruelty and violence, men too are entitled to the same safeguards under the law. To suggest otherwise would violate the very basic principles of equality and human dignity, and this court cannot differentiate between genders when it comes to acts of physical violence or causing injuries. Creating a special class of leniency for one gender would erode the foundational principles of justice in cases of life threatening bodily injuries,” the High Court said.
This case also highlights a broader societal challenge: High Court
The court, while rejecting the submissions of the woman accused, further said that this case also highlights a broader societal challenge.
“Men who are victims of violence at the hands of their wives often face unique difficulties, including societal disbelief and the stigma associated with being perceived as a victim. Such stereotypes perpetuate the erroneous belief that men cannot suffer violence in domestic relationships. Thus, the Courts must recognize the need for a gender-neutral approach to such cases, by ensuring that men and women are treated alike,” the High Court said while dismissing woman’s bail plea.
