If there is a good chance of settlement, time limit can be extended, says Bench
The Supreme Court has directed all the family courts to
make all efforts to settle matrimonial disputes through mediation.It
said cases must be referred to mediation centres in adherence to Section
9 of the Family Courts Act.
Giving this direction, a
Bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Desai said: “Even if the
counsellors submit a failure report, the courts shall, with the consent
of the parties, refer the matter to the mediation centre. In such a
case, however, the courts shall set a reasonable time limit to complete
the process of mediation because otherwise the resolution of the
disputes may get delayed. In a given case, if there is a good chance of
settlement, the court in its discretion can always extend the time
limit.”
Taking note of the increasing number of
complaints of dowry harassment being filed against husbands and their
families under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, the Bench said:
“The criminal courts dealing with the complaint under Section 498-A of
the IPC should, at any stage, and particularly before they take up the
complaint for hearing, refer the parties to mediation centres if they
feel that there exist elements of settlement and both the parties are
willing. However, they should take care to see that in this exercise,
rigour, purport and efficacy of Section 498-A of the IPC is not diluted.
Needless to say, the discretion to grant or not to grant bail is not in
any way curtailed by this direction. It will be for the concerned court
to work out the modalities taking into consideration the facts of each
case.”
Writing the judgment, Justice Desai said: “All
mediation centres shall set up pre-litigation desks/clinics, give them
wide publicity and make efforts to settle matrimonial disputes at the
pre-litigation stage.”
In this case, the Bench said:
“The conduct of the respondent wife, Ms. D.A. Deepa, in filing a
complaint making an unfounded, indecent and defamatory allegation
against her mother-in-law, in filing revision seeking enhancement of the
sentence awarded to the appellant-husband, K. Srinivas Rao, in filing
appeal questioning the acquittal of the appellant-husband and acquittal
of his parents, indicates that she made all attempts to ensure that he
and his parents are put in jail and he is removed from his job. We have
no manner of doubt that this conduct has caused mental cruelty to the
appellant-husband. In the ultimate analysis, we hold that [as a result
of such conduct] the marriage has irretrievably broken down. Dissolution
of marriage will relieve both sides of pain and anguish.”
No comments:
Post a Comment