New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday (January 27) refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking direction to constitute an expert committee of retired judges, lawyers and eminent legal jurists headed by former top court judge to review and reform the existing dowry and domestic violence laws and curb its misuse.
A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, while not inclined to entertain the petition filed by Vishal Tiwari, dismissed the plea, saying it was in the domain of the legislature.
PIL was filed in the wake of Bengaluru techie committing suicide alleging mental harassment by wife, in-laws
The PIL was filed by Tiwari before the apex court in the wake of 34-year-old techie Atul Subhash committing suicide on December 9 last year at his home in Bengaluru allegedly due to mental harassment arising out of multiple cases related to matrimonial dispute lodged against him by his wife.
Atul Subhash left behind a 24-page death note and video message
Atul Shubhash left behind a 24-page purported death note and also a video message sharing in detail the emotional distress he allegedly went through arising out of marital issues, multiple cases getting filed against him and harassment by his wife and relatives and an Uttar Pradesh-based judge hearing cases related to his marital disputes.
What did the PIL seek?
The plea sought a direction to the respondents to consider and implement the top court’s observations in Preeti Gupta versus State of Jharkhand and Achin Gupta versus State of Haryana cases to stop harassment of husband and his family members.
The plea also sought a direction that along with every marriage registration application, the list of articles/gifts/money given during the marriage be also furnished with affidavit and the record of those shall be kept and enclosed with the marriage registration certificate.
What did apex court say in its 2010 verdict?
The top court in its verdict in its 2010 verdict in the case of Preeti Gupta versus State of Jharkhand said that a serious relook of section 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was warranted by the legislation, observing that exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number of complaints and the tendency of over implication is also reflected in a very large number of cases.
