SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Guj) 647

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :AKSHAY H.MEHTA, K.R.VYAS
K.M.VIN PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT - Appellant
Versus
DASHRATH DEVADA PRESIDENT - Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION 1630 of 2002
Decided On : 09/22/2005

Advocates Appeared: J.R.Nanavati, P.R.ABICHANDANI, P.R.NANAVATI, S.B.VAKIL, S.V.RAJU, SUO MOTU

Headnote:

Societies Registration Act, 1960 – Offence of cruelty and harassment - Respondent was established by Memorandum of Association amongst other objects to assist husband and his family from cruelty of his wife where files cases against husband and his family in respect of dowry divorce and other disputes - Society was formed by memorandum of Association and it was found that wife filing false cases against husband and his family is indulging in cruelty and harassment to husband and his family and Authority are also harassing husband and their family on account of complaint of wife - According to him there are members and members have made a complaint against cruelty from their wives as arbitrary orders passed by Family Court against them - Association has several times agitated their grievances against Authority and they have held program me of dharma on various occasions at various places including family courts - According to him these women organizations are home breakers rather than protectors of women/s rights - Family Courts are located to protest against alleged atrocities committed by wives against their suffering husbands and carry out said program me by erecting man dap and install mikes and loud speakers etc - Respondent and members of thereafter indulged into shouting slogans like family courts of High Court and of Supreme Court and which made it impossible for family courts to work – Held, Apex court borne in mind that there was no imminent danger of interference with administration of justice nor of bringing administration into disrepute - While reading speech of Minister read in its proper perspective according to Apex Court it did not bring administration of justice into disrepute or impair administration of justice though in some portions of speech language used could have been avoided by Minister having the background of being a former Judge of High Court - Opponent in instant case as record reveals is literate being editor of newspaper and knows implication of law and is aware of its consequence of staging dharma shouting slogans against the courts had staged dharma at different places at different times in all three occasions at the family court - Therefore is clear that he is out and out against family courts - Endeavour is to lower image of said court in eye of public - Merely because Apex Court in case shown magnanimity to contemnor by observing that judiciary cannot be immune from criticism - While accepting said principles would have given similar treatment by showing magnanimity - However, before and during the course of hearing of the present proceedings, even though we have suggested Advocate to persuade opponent to tender unconditional apology even though did try to persuade him he has refused to do that - This is nothing but arrogance and prejudice against family court - Application allowed (Para 19)

KSHITIJ R. VYAS, J.

( 1 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 " Dashrath Devda is the President of Akhil Bharatiya Patni Atyachar Virodhi Sangh (for short, "sangh") which is also known as All India Wives Cruelty Opposition Union. He is also impleaded as respondent no. 2 in the capacity as Editor of "crime Pen". According to respondent no. 1, the said Sangh is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960 before the Asstt. Registrar, Registration of Societies, Ahmedabad on 23. 6. 1998. It was established by Memorandum of Association amongst other objects to assist the husband and his family from cruelty of his wife where the wife files cases against the husband and his family in respect of dowry, divorce and other disputes. The society was formed by the aforesaid memorandum of Association and it was found that the wife filing false cases against the husband and his family is indulging in cruelty and harassment to the husband and his family and the Authority are also harassing the husband and their family on account of the complaint of the wife. According to him, there are 13700 members and the members have made a complaint against the cruelty from their wives as well as arbitrary orders passed by the Family Court against them. The Association has several times agitated their grievances against the Authority and they have held programme of dharna on various occasions, at various places including the family courts. According to respondent no. 1, the Sangh has been campaigning for the past 5 years to spread its creed that atrocities by wives on husbands are becoming a serious menace to the society. One of its main targets are womens organisations which according to respondent no. 1 are responsible for the growing instances of wives using laws weighed heavily in their favour to get even with their spouses. According to him, these womens organisations are home breakers rather than protectors of women/s rights.

( 2 ) RESPONDENT no. 1 applied for and obtained a permit dated January 18, 2002 from the Addl. Police Commissioner , Ahmedabad City to enable the Sangh to implement the programme of dharna, demonstration, slogan shouting opposite Krishi Bhavan, Paldi, Ahmedabad in the City of Ahmedabad in which the family Courts are located, to protest against the alleged atrocities committed by the wives against their suffering husbands and carry out the said programme by erecting mandap and install mikes and loud speakers etc. Respondent no. 1 and the members of the Sangh thereafter indulged into shouting slogans like "hai hai family courts, of High Court, and of Supreme Court and which made it impossible for the family courts to work. The learned Principal Judge, Family Court, her letter dated January, 28, 2002 addressed to the Registrar of this Court, gave details about dharna, demonstrations and slogan shouting by respondent no. 1 and the members of the Sangh. She has also stated that on contacting the Registrar, the High Court of Gujarat, P. S. To the Honble Chief Justice, Police Commissioners Office and Ellisbridge police station and informed on phone about the incident to Mr Chauhan, PSI of Ellisbridge police station who appeared before the Principal Judge and produced permission to use loudspeaker to arrange meeting in a public place issued on behalf of the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad City dated 18. 1. 2002 between 10. 30 am and 5. 30 p. m. i. e. During the court hours. The place is shown as Family Court, Krishi Bhavan, Paldi, Ahmedabad. According to her, this permission, if perused, clearly appears as interference of administration of justice as it obstructed the functioning of the Courts. She has further stated that the police officer was not able to take necessary steps to stop the shouting. In her letter, it was mentioned that she could hear the following words from her Chamber:i. "family court hai hai, ii. Supreme Court hai hai, iii. Family Court bandh karo (close the family court) iv. Ek kachhori do samosa, family court, tera k























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top