In the times of injustice and distress, judiciary is the last hope for the people who are abandoned by the society. We need judges who can ensure that the society remains just for every single citizen of the country. In recent times the Madras High Court has made a number of significant observations and rulings which has far-reaching consequences and one can safely say are in tune with time.Here are some recent judgements by the Madras high court that make us proud of our judicial system.
In a recent observation, the Madras High Court had noted that refusal to marry does not give a man the right to attack a woman. The judges made their observation, while hearing a bail application moved a man, who was arrested for stabbing his girlfriend, who refused to marry him.?
The judges noted that such, "Incidents continue to happen because man thinks that a woman is a chattel and she has to concede to whatever a man demands. This attitude has to be changed and no man has any right to compel any girl to fall in love with him or to marry him."
Another significant intervention by the Madras HC came last week in a POCSO case where a man was sentenced to 10 years in jail for abducting a girl who was 17 years old at the time.
Setting aside the lower court order with found the accused guilty, the Madras HC suggested that anyone above the age of 16 or above should not be considered a minor and Ą°Any consensual sex after the age of 16 or bodily contact or allied acts could be excluded from the rigorous provisions of POCSO Act, and sexual assault could be tried under more liberal provisions which can be introduced in the Act, differentiating sexual assault and teenage relationships.Ąą
Last year, the Supreme Court struck down Section 377, which criminalised same-sex relation. While it was a welcome step, the court stopped short of allowing same-sex marriages.
But the Madras High Court in a recent judgment ruled that ĄŽbrideĄ¯ as per the Hindu Marriage Act would also mean a transsexual, and not just refer to someone born as a woman.
Holding that the expression ĄŽbrideĄ¯ would have to include not only a woman but also a transwoman, the judge directed the authorities to register a marriage between Arun Kumar and Sreeja, a transwoman.
The couple had moved the court after the registration department refused to register their marriage, held on October 31 at a temple in Tuticorin, and issue a certificate.
Aadhaar and its merits and demerits are still a highly polarizing topic. Those opposed to making it mandatory have cited a number of reasons including data privacy to make their case. The Madras High Court, while rejecting a plea of a teacher challenging the introduction of Aadhaar Enabled Biometric Attendance System in Government Schools, asked her to either get enrolled herself to Aadhaar or to leave the service.
BCCL
A Government High School teacher had challenged the implementation of Aadhar Enabled Biometric Attendance System for Teaching and Non-Teaching Staff employed in Government and Government Aided High Schools or Higher Secondary Schools across Tamil Nadu. She had argued that she has not enrolled under the Aadhaar as the same is not mandatory.?
Justice SM Subramaniam observed that collecting the individual particulars and identification as far as the Government servants are concerned, cannot be construed as a violation of the Fundamental Rights ensured under the Constitution of India.?
Acquitting a man, who was sentenced to ten years in jail on charges of abetting his wifeĄ¯s suicide the Madras HC had in October said the illicit relationship would not come under the ambit of cruelty under IPC section 498 A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty).
The woman had ended her life in 2003 by jumping into a well along with her 18-month-old daughter as she was upset over her husbandĄ¯s extra-marital affair.