RAHUL RAINA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is submitted on behalf of respondents that Police Station Women Cell had, on the complaint of estranged wife-respondent No. 7, been making endeavours for settlement between the petitioner and respondent No. 7. However, no formal case has been registered against the petitioner. After hearing the rival sides, it appears that social policing is the responsibility of Police Station Women Cell which deals with the crimes against women. However, it cannot, justifiably, keep the complaints pending like a sword of Damocles hanging on the head of the spouse of complainant indefinitely. If efforts at reconciliation prove abortive, the Women Cell is bound to take decision in regard to registration of case depending upon the nature of allegations in the complaint. Summoning of the allegedly erring spouse to Women Cell day in and day out, exerting pressure on such spouse to enter into a settlement and pay-off the money suggested as settlement money are matters falling in the forbidden zone. The exercise of such power would be in brazen deviation from the statute. A Women's Cell may be playing the role of social policing befitting in appropriate cases as a preliminary measure but it cannot assume the role of a family Court/Matrimonial Court. Working out settlements involving monetary transactions, grant of alimony or disputes relating to Istri Dhan are matters which do not fall within the non-ad-judicatory role of the Women Cell. Practices adopted to the contrary being in conflict with law are required to be abandoned.

(2.) After hearing learned counsel for parties, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the instant petition in view of the fact that no case has been registered against the petitioner till date and his association with any criminal proceedings is not contemplated at this stage. The petition is disposed of with a direction to official respondents not to cause any harassment to petitioner. Disposed of along with connected CMA(s).