Andhra HC tells police to stay out of matrimonial dispute, says they have no power in civil matters

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has directed police to stay out of a pending matrimonial dispute, holding that law enforcement has no authority to interfere in civil or potentially civil disputes between citizens and ordering authorities not to insist on the production of the couple’s children.

Justice Sunitha Gandham, hearing a plea by a 44-year-old man, observed that under the Constitution the duty to resolve civil disputes rests with the judiciary, not the police. “In the scheme of the Constitution of India, the duty to resolve civil disputes is entrusted to the judiciary, and the police have no such power; involvement of police in a pending civil dispute or potential civil dispute between two citizens or two groups of citizens is not within the provisions of the police,” the September 2 order read.

The petitioner, who said he married his wife in 2014 in a second marriage for both, alleged that police were harassing him by citing various cases filed by his estranged wife and demanding that he produce their children. He said the couple had two children, and that after matrimonial discord his wife lodged complaints in 2020 and filed a habeas corpus petition before the Telangana High Court seeking custody, alongside a guardianship and custody petition before a family court in Ranga Reddy district. While the parties later reached a settlement under which he paid substantial permanent alimony, he claimed his wife continued to harass him, the children and his parents, and that police, invoking one of the pending cases, were insisting on the children’s presence.

In her counter, the wife acknowledged that matrimonial and related cases were pending but alleged that her husband and his family had harassed her and taken custody of the children, forcing her to leave them. Her counsel argued that she had filed for visitation rights, which was pending before the district court, and that as a mother she had the right to see the children; Justice Gandham said such arguments must be advanced before the concerned court, as the present petition sought relief against police interference in civil and matrimonial disputes.

The government pleader contended that police had not interfered in the civil and matrimonial disputes and had never insisted on the children’s presence, except for serving a notice on the man in connection with a criminal case. Citing Supreme Court precedents that police cannot intervene in purely civil disputes where no crime is registered, the high court directed authorities not to interfere in the matrimonial dispute between the man and his wife except in accordance with law, and not to insist on the presence of the children.