Unless set aside, even a void trial verdict subsists
  • This Section
  • Latest
  • Web Wrap
Last Updated: Wednesday, August 24, 2011, 22:37
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has held that even a questionable and ab initio void judicial verdict continues to subsist unless specifically set aside by a competent court of law on a plea by the affected party.

A bench of justices P Sathasivam and B S Chauhan has reiterated this legal priciple while quashing a criminal complaint by a woman in Punjab accusing her former husband, from whom she had secured a divorce as per mutual consent, of indulging in domestic violence against her.

The woman had lodged the complaint in a magisterial court against her former husband under the Protection of Woman from the Domestic Violence Act contending the decree of divorce she had procured from her husband as per mutual consent was a sham and she herself was "a party to the fraud on court."

"It is well-settled principle of law that even a void order is required to be set aside by a competent court of law as an order may be void in respect of one person but may be valid in respect of another," the bench said.

"An order cannot be declared to be void in collateral proceedings and that too in the absence of the authorities who were the authors thereof," the bench added.

Married to a Punjab college professor Inderjit Singh Grewal in September 1998, Amandeep Kaur, a lecturer in another college, had moved a civil court in September 2007 for divorce on the basis of mutual consent and got it six months later in March, 2008, when the couple reiterated their intention to part ways, saying they have settled their issues of alimony etcetera for good.


First Published: Wednesday, August 24, 2011, 22:37

comments powered by Disqus