Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court

Justice Not Faith-Driven: Delhi HC Dismisses Plea for Special Protocols on Pardanashin Women; Stresses Universal Application of Article 21

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court  rejected the plea seeking special police protocols for pardanashin women. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma emphasized the need for justice-driven decisions, affirming the universal applicability of Article 21 irrespective of religious customs like pardah.

The petitioner, Reshma, had sought directives for police sensitization in handling women observing pardah, under the claim of fundamental rights protection.

The crux of the petition involved evaluating whether the police’s legal framework sufficiently respected pardanashin women’s customs, and whether additional protocols were necessary. The Court concluded that existing legal safeguards were adequate and emphasizing extra procedural requirements could undermine police effectiveness in critical situations.

The judgment clarified that the legal concept of a pardanashin woman historically referred to women living in seclusion, unacquainted with worldly matters, and not necessarily linked to religious practices. The Court noted the evolution of women’s societal role, rendering the concept less relevant in modern urban contexts.

The Court held that the right to dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution extends universally, irrespective of religious practices like pardah. It also stated that religious rights under Article 25 are subject to public order and security considerations.

Justice Sharma highlighted the impracticality and potential hazard of imposing additional protocols on police, especially in urgent situations. The judgment emphasized the need for police to balance cultural sensitivity with public safety and efficient law enforcement.

The Court underlined that directives must be driven by justice, not faith, and any additional directive could be misused, obstructing police work. The judgment also recognized the need for legal restrictions on police investigations to balance societal safety with individual rights.

Petitioner’s request for specific police sensitization directives was dismissed, citing sufficiency of existing legal frameworks and the impracticality of additional directives.

Decision Date: March 1, 2024

Reshma vs. The Commissioner of Police

 

Latest Legal News