Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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