At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Photos, Videos Must Go: Supreme Court Binds Warring Spouses to Clean Up Social Media in Matrimonial Settlement Standard for Bail Under Section 319 CrPC Is Higher Than Framing of Charge, But Short of Conviction: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused Summoned Mid-Trial State Cannot Arbitrarily Deny Subsidies to 'New Industrial Units' by Retrospectively Applying Expansion Caps: Supreme Court Companies Act | Offence Under Section 448 Is Covered Under Section 447: Supreme Court Bars Private Complaint Without SFIO Nod “See-To-It” Obligation Is Not A Guarantee Under Indian Law: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope Of Section 126 ICA In IBC Disputes Mere Employment of Litigant’s Relatives in Police or Court Doesn't Prove Judicial Bias: Supreme Court Sets Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Reserved Candidate Availing Relaxed Standards in Prelims Cannot Migrate to General Quota for Cadre Allocation: Supreme Court Mere Vesting Does Not Mean Possession: Supreme Court Rules ULC Proceedings Abated For Failure To Serve Mandatory Notice To Actual Occupants Contempt of Courts Act | Natural Justice in Administrative Action: Supreme Court Directs West Bengal Govt to Re-Adjudicate Teachers' Arrears Claims Live-In Relationship with Married Man Not a ‘Relationship in the Nature of Marriage’ Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay High Court Applies Supreme Court Guidelines Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court 138 NI Act | Issuance of Separate Cheques Gives Rise to Independent Causes of Action, Even if Drawn for Same Underlying Transaction: Supreme Court

Karnataka High Court: "Life is too short to be little" - Expeditious Resolution of Matrimonial Cases Upheld as a Constitutional Right

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishna S Dixit, delivered a landmark judgement on Writ Petition No. 14769 of 2023 (GM-FC) on July 26, 2023. The case brought to light the distressing issue of prolonged pendency of matrimonial cases in courts, and the court's verdict emphasized the constitutional guarantee of the right to speedy justice under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Representing the petitioner, Sri. N Rajeev, Advocate Sri. Basavaraj R Bannur ardently presented the case before the court. The petitioner sought the dissolution/nullity of marriage with the respondent, Smt. C. Deepa, invoking Section 13(1) (IA) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Justice Dixit's judgment eloquently highlighted the urgency of resolving matrimonial disputes expeditiously. Quoting the renowned British historian, Thomas Carlyle, the court reiterated, "Life is too short to be little." The court observed that undue delays in matrimonial cases have a severe impact on the lives of the parties involved, emphasizing the need to grant them an opportunity to move on and rebuild their lives.

Recognizing the paramount importance of timely justice, the court dispensed with notice to the respondent, assuring her of a fair opportunity to participate in the trial. The judgment directed the Family Court Judge to expedite the trial and disposal of the seven-year-old case within an outer limit of three months.

The verdict also addressed the wider issue of expediting similar cases in the future, as the court instructed the Registrar General to circulate the judgment among concerned circles. This move aims to prevent litigants from unnecessarily seeking directions for the expeditious disposal of their cases.

The ruling of the Karnataka High Court sets a precedent for other courts across the country to consider the urgency of matrimonial cases and uphold the right to speedy justice. This landmark decision reaffirms the principle that courts should make all efforts to promptly resolve matrimonial disputes to enable the parties involved to move forward with their lives.

 Date of Decision:26th July, 2023

SRI. N RAJEEV vs  SMT. C. DEEPA,

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/NRajeev_Vs_CDeepa_28July23_Karnt.HC_.pdf"]

Latest Legal News