High Court News: The Bombay High Court said that merely saying that Pierre’s husband or in-laws would not allow him to live with her if he did not bring the demanded money, cannot be termed as mental or physical harassment.
Mrs. Kankanwadi and Ny. Joshi’s bench said that the wife had stated in the FIR filed against her husband and her in-laws that she had received Rs. Asked her father to bring an amount of five lakhs so that her husband could get a permanent government job. However, his parents were poor and could not afford such a sum.
The husband and in-laws replied that if she did not bring the money, she should not go back to her in-laws’ house. She was repeatedly tortured mentally and physically. Acts of mental and physical torture not specified. Mere giving of statement does not amount to physical or mental torture, the judge said in his January 10 order.
In this case, the wife has not told the exact date and for when the demand was made. The judge said the wife’s allegations were vague as she did not describe how she was subjected to cruelty and abuse. The judge also expressed concern over the manner in which such cases were investigated by the police, noting that most of the statements recorded by the police were those of a relative of the complainant woman and were copied exactly.
The court also said that it is not necessary for the police to file chargesheet against all the persons mentioned in the FIR. If the accused stay away then they can be implicated in the crime in some way. The investigating officer should file charge sheet only against those against whom there is solid evidence. There should not be undue harassment and wrongful involvement, the court said.
