🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Panna Lal Vs Smt. Suman and Others

Case No: Writ Petition No. 2076 of 1980

Date of Decision: Aug. 11, 1980

Citation: (1980) AWC 623

Hon'ble Judges: K.S. Verma, J; Hari Swarup, J

Bench: Division Bench

Advocate: R.P. Srivastava and J.P. Rastogi, for the Appellant; H.A. Siddiqui, for the Respondent

Final Decision: Dismissed

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

Hari Swarup, J.@mdashDowry-torture is no more a matter of speculation. Here is a married girl of 15, tortured, beaten and ill-treated because

her parents fall to satisfy the dowry demand of her in-laws.

2. This petition has been moved by Panna Lal, father of Smt. Suman. It is alleged that Smt, Suman was married to Hardwari lal sometime in April

this year, but she is being tortured and kept confined against her will as she had not taken with her sufficient dowry.

3. Suman has been produced by her husband in return to the rule issued by us. We have examined her in the presence of her husband. She has

stated that she is being kept confined in the house of her in-laws against her will, that she does not want to stay there but wants to go to her

parents'' house. She has further stated that she is cruelly treated in the house, she is beaten every day and even her husband beats her. She had

taken with her some dowry, but a further demand is made for a Television set, and Rs. 2,000/-. She states her life is in danger.

4. Her husband became furious when she gave out her sad tale, and even in our Chamber, where we held the proceedings, threatened to beat her

when she stated that from her a demand was made by her in-laws for a Television set and Rs. 2,000/- cash.

5. From Smt. Suman''s statement it is proved that she is being detained in the house of her husband and her parents-in-law against her will and that

she is being cruelly treated in that house. The case of cruel treatment is primarily due to failure on her part to; (sic) the dowry demand.

6. It will not in our opinion be safe to permit her to remain with her in laws. Accordingly instead of directing only that she be set at liberty, we direct

further that Smt. Suman being minor according to her statement, be given into the custody of her father.

7. It is a pity that we do not have legal-aid clinics where such people in distress may be sent for social and psychological counselling. It is a case

where both husband and wife need marital counselling to avoid the break-up of their marital relations.

8. In the result, we issue a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus and set Smt. Suman at liberty forthwith and direct that she be taken under police

escort along with her father, to the Railway Station and be helped to board the train for Rae Bareli.