I hate to say "I told you so". Actually, no, who am I kidding, I relish saying "I told you so". So I'm smug and tickled to remind you, my billions of followers, that we had spoken earlier in these here pages of the possibility of the extension of the Domestic Violence Act to victims of all sexes. Accordingly, the Karnataka High Court stepped up to the plate last week to instruct a Magistrate to take cognizance of a complaint filed by a Man under the Domestic Violence Act.
Back then we had 'mourned' the decline in status of the Great Indian Male Persons (GIMPs) - they were not the only ones anymore who were liable to be prosecuted under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 after all, and this gave rise to the possibility that they would soon be able to complain of domestic violence themselves. We had wished though that it would be Parliament that would expand the scope of the Act rather than the Courts, a wish that is looking even more forlorn now. With Parliament too busy certifying non-Money Bills as Money Bills to look into the plight of the greatly enfeebled Indian Men, the judiciary has pulled the ball back into its, er, court.
More to follow, I'm sure. It'll be fascinating, for example, to see how they get past the definition of an aggrieved person in S. 2(a) of the Act, since only such persons, per the Act, can be victims of domestic violence...
The more the Legislature shuns its constitutional duty of law-making on contemporary issues thrown up by march of civilisation(Really?),the more such instances of judicial activism (whatever that means!)to fill the legislative vacuum, with consequent furore about judicial overreach. Legislative under-reach anyone?
ReplyDeleteNail on the head, as ever, Doc. One can almost see the government's view regarding the NJAC - if they're writing so much of the law, might as well have the people indirectly choose them..
Delete