The Delhi High Court recently addressed the increasing trend of implicating all relatives of the husband in cases filed under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). A division bench comprising Justices V Kameswar Rao and Anoop Kumar Mendiratta made this observation while dealing with a case where a man’s appointment as a sub-inspector was put on hold due to his name being included in an FIR filed by his sister-in-law.
The bench noted that many such complaints are eventually settled out of court, indicating a pattern of misuse. The Court granted relief to the petitioner, whose appointment as a sub-inspector with the Delhi Police was kept on hold due to the FIR.
“There is a growing tendency among women to implicate all relatives, including minors, when an FIR is lodged related to matrimonial disputes. Many such complaints are eventually settled between the families and are often filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues. The misuse of this provision has been substantially noticed, though the law’s primary purpose cannot be ignored,” the Court said.
The petitioner had applied for the sub-inspector position in response to a recruitment notice issued by the Staff Selection Commission on April 22, 2017. He successfully cleared all examinations between May 2017 and September 2018.
Despite clearing all requisite exams, the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, decided to keep his appointment on hold due to the FIR filed against him by his sister-in-law. The Court noted that his name appeared in column 12 of the charge sheet, indicating no evidence of his involvement in the alleged offences.
“Considering the petitioner was placed in Column 12 of the charge sheet and no evidence established his involvement in the offences, he should have been considered suitable for appointment. Merely being named in the FIR cannot be treated as an obstacle for public appointment unless the involvement is substantiated upon investigation, especially in matrimonial cases,” the bench observed.
The Court emphasized that merely being named in the FIR should not lead to an indefinite hold on employment. The authorities were influenced by the FIR’s mention of the petitioner, despite no substantial evidence against him.
With these observations, the bench ordered the authorities to appoint the petitioner as a sub-inspector with the Delhi Police.
Case Title: Vikram Ruhal vs Delhi Police
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
