E-Paper
Couple fighting legal battle for 20 years reunited, CJI plays special role
The Andhra Pradesh-based woman had sought enhancement of jail term for her husband in a dowry harassment case, which she had been pursuing since 2001. CJI NV Ramanna spoke to the woman and explained to her in Telugu about losing the monthly compensation.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday reunited a couple who has been fighting a legal battle for the last 20 years. Chief Justice of India, N V Ramana, played a special role in resolving the dispute between Andhra Pradesh-based estranged couple.
The woman had sought enhancement of jail term for her husband in a dowry harassment case. When the case came up for hearing, Chief Justice Ramanna asked to speak to the couple through video conferencing.
As the woman was not comfortable in speaking in English, the official language of the court, the CJI conversed in Telugu and also explained her statements to fellow judge.
"If your husband goes to jail you will lose the monthly compensation as he will lose his job," the CJI told the woman. The other judge in the bench was Justice Surya Kant.
The man against whom the charges were pressed by the wife, is a state government employee in Guntur district of Andhra Pradesh. His lawyer said the CJI explained to the woman that if the jail sentence of her husband is enhanced, she will have to forego the monthly compensation, news agency PTI reported.
The woman heard CJI’s advice patiently and agreed to live with her spouse provided she and their only son are maintained properly by her husband, the lawyer was quoted as saying by PTI.
Both husband and wife agreed to withdraw their respective petitions against each other.
The two got married in 1998, but the relationship soon turned sour following which the woman filed a criminal case in 2001. She had also named her mother-in-law and the sister-in-law. Several mediation bids were made by different courts, but they all failed.
The husband received a jail term of one year, but the wife wanted an enhancement of the sentence and moved the petitions in sessions court, high court and finally, the Supreme Court.
