S.498-A IPC | Matrimonial Dispute Is Not Moral Turpitude; Cannot Be Used To Block Spouses' Right To Education: Bombay High Court
Narsi Benwal
2 Nov 2024 11:00 AM IST
In a significant order, the Bombay High Court bench at Aurangabad recently held that a matrimonial dispute or case is a 'personal dispute' which cannot be termed to be an offence related to 'moral turpitude' to impact either of the spouses right to pursue further education in their lives.
A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Santosh Chapalgaonkar permitted a husband to pursue his All India Ayush Post Graduate Entrance Test (AIAPGET) - 2024, a course for which he was held 'ineligible' on the ground that he has been booked in a section 498-A case along with charges under the stringent Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
"Pertinently, the petitioner is facing criminal prosecution for offence punishable under sections 498-A (domestic violence and cruelty), 494 (second marriage during lifetime of first spouse) of IPC read with section 3(1)(r)(s) (insulting an SC ST person) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, on the basis of the report made by his wife. Apparently, this is a case of matrimonial i.e. personal dispute between the petitioner and his wife. It is difficult to hold that such offence can be termed as offence relating to moral turpitude, which may have an impact on the entitlement of the petitioner to pursue his educational upliftment through in-service Post Graduate Course," the judges held in the order passed on October 25.
According to the petitioner, he was appointed as Medical Officer – Group B and posted at Primary Health Center at Tamloor in Nanded on July 18, 2019. On April 16, 2024, a public notice was issued inviting on-line applications for the AIAPGET - 2024 and the petitioner having the requisite qualifications, sought the mandatory no objection certificate (NOC) since he was a government employee at the relevant time.
By an order passed on June 28, 2024, the Deputy Director of Health Services in Nanded granted an NOC to the petitioner, following which he appeared in the exams and cleared the same with 184 marks out of the total 400. However, the Deputy Director of Health Services withdrew the NOC on September 24, 2024 after noting that a criminal case was pending against the petitioner.
The authority relied on a Government Resolution (GR) issued on July 19, 2023 which indicated the policy of the Government to regulate the grant permission for pursuing Post-Graduate education to 'in-service' Medical Officers. A specific clause (Clause 4.5) in the GR, the authority pointed out, prescribed that Medical Officer, against whom a departmental inquiry or criminal case is pending or proposed, shall be treated as 'ineligible' for NEET-PG entrance test.
The judges while rejecting the argument of the prosecution, noted that the withdrawal of NOC granted in favour of the petitioner is only for the reason that a criminal case is pending against him.
"There is no stipulation in the impugned order that the petitioner had obtained NOC by suppression of fact about pendency of criminal case," the bench said.
The bench, therefore, quashed the NOC withdrawal order and held the petitioner 'eligible' for the AIAPGET-2024 course and ordered his admission to the said course.
Appearance:
Advocate GJ Karne appeared for the Petitioner.
Additional Government Pleader AM Phule represented the State.
Case Title: Doctor vs State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition 10599 of 2024)
