Chamatkar Mohiney Debi vs Mohes Chunder Banerjee

Trevelyan, J.—This is an application for the examination of a Hindu lady, the Plaintiff, under commission. It is opposed on the ground that she is not entitled to the benefits of sec. 640, C.P.C. In the first place charges of immorality are made against her. I do not think I need consider them. I do not think they are relevant. It may be Mr. Garth is right and that they show she has appeared in public. It is then said that she has been in the habit of appearing in public and has no regard to the customs of her country and religion. Her denial is given in general terms, and though there are difficulties in the case, I should be exceedingly careful before I forced into the public gaze a woman who may have gone outside the purdah whether by way of experiment, or otherwise. Many a woman may desire to taste the sweets of unsecluded life and gone out of the purdah and may desire to go back. Because a woman may once or twice have gone outside the purdah, is the Court to keep her outside ? The question is not whether this woman who does more or less frequently go about in public should be made to appear in Court, but whether I ought to compel her to appear in public. On the materials before me I think I shall be erring on the right side if I refuse to take away from her the privilege she is entitled to and which but for the circumstances which have been stated and which are denied she would unquestionably have been entitled to. On the whole it is safer to let this commission go. Costs of motion to be costs in the cause-cost of the examination of the lady to be reserved.