Police Must Follow Due Process in Matrimonial Disputes Under Section 528 BNSS: Madras High Court

Protecting Due Process: High Court Curbs Police Harassment in Matrimonial Disputes

In a significant order aimed at curbing the overreach of law enforcement in domestic matters, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has issued clear directives regarding police conduct during inquiries. The Court emphasized that matrimonial disputes—typically civil in nature—should not be transformed into tools for police harassment.

Presiding over the case N. Anand vs. The State of Tamilnadu , Honourable Mrs. Justice L. Victoria Gowri highlighted the necessity for police to adhere strictly to statutory procedures, ensuring that the investigative powers granted under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, are not misused.

Background: A Matrimonial Standoff

The petitioner, N. Anand, moved the High Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, seeking protection from alleged police harassment. He contended that, at the behest of his estranged wife (the third respondent, M. Indhumathi), police officials from the All Women Police Station (AWPS), Sivagangai, were repeatedly summoning and ill-treating him and his family members under the guise of an inquiry.

The respondent state, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, argued that the petitioner was merely being required to appear for an inquiry following a formal complaint filed by his wife, noting that a separate case (IDOP No. 331 of 2022) is already pending before the Family Court in Sivagangai.

Legal Analysis: Distinguishing Civil and Criminal Jurisdictions

Justice L. Victoria Gowri noted that the Court is "conscious that under Section 528 BNSS, 2023, it may issue appropriate directions to ensure that police powers are exercised strictly in accordance with law."

The Court’s ruling reinforces a long-standing legal principle: police machinery should not be weaponized to resolve purely matrimonial disputes. By mandating that inquiries must be conducted with proper procedure, the Court effectively sought to strike a balance between allowing the police to perform their duties and protecting citizens from arbitrary intimidation.

Key Observations

The judgment offers a firm framework for police interaction with the public. Below are the pivotal observations:

• On the misuse of power : “This Court is conscious that under Section 528 BNSS, 2023, it may issue appropriate directions to ensure that police powers are exercised strictly in accordance with law and not in a manner that converts civil disputes into criminal proceedings.”
• On procedural mandates : “The second respondent police is directed to issue written summons/notice under Section 62 Cr.P.C / 64 BNSS, 2023, specifying the date, time, and purpose of enquiry and thereafter conduct the enquiry in a fair and impartial manner.”
• On the expectation of conduct : “The second respondent police are strictly directed not to cause any harassment to the petitioner. The petitioner, in turn, is directed to appear before the second respondent police, if duly summoned and to co-operate with the enquiry.”

The Road Ahead: Implications of the Ruling

The final decision requires the police to provide formal written notice before requiring a person's presence. This serves as a vital safeguard against the "guise of enquiry" often used to bypass formal legal processes.

For future cases, this ruling serves as a precedent ensuring that in the shadow of shifting legal codes—from the older Code of Criminal Procedure to the new BNSS—the fundamental rights of citizens remain protected. The Court’s order acknowledges that while cooperation in law enforcement is mandatory, it must occur within the parameters of fairness, transparency, and established legal procedure.

This case is now disposed of, with the Court’s clear directive acting as a leash on investigative overreach in sensitive domestic conflicts.