Friday, March 11, 2016

the stiff competition between fake rape and fake DV, Fake maintenance cases !! Matrimony in India !!

IF woman files a false rape case and guy wins case, woman gets dose from court but NO money; IF woman files FALSE DV or false maintenance case woman anyhow gets interim maintenance, ad interim maintenance and in case of divorce she gets alimony even if she is proven to be cruel... now tell me which is worse ? FALSE rape case or false MOOLAH case ???

#fake_Rape #fake_DV #Fake_sec_125 #Maintenance #alimony


FOLLOW on twitter or on wordpress or  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

RAPE, cheating etc on 7 of boy’s family just Bcaz engagement cancelled! Bombay HC fines police, quashes case!!

RAPE, cheating on 7 ppl of boy's family just Because marriage engagement cancelled! Bombay HC fines police, quashes case!!

When an engagement is cancelled girl goes on to file rape (sec 376) & cheating (sec 417) on the boy , his sisters, his Uncle, Aunt etc. Boy's Uncle and aunt, who are doctors by profession are denied AB and arrested though they are NOT involved in the rape case !! (in jail for approx 14 days !) All this is AFTER Arnesh Kumar case Judgement by Hon Apex court. Later they seek regular bail and that is ALSO delayed in spite of HC directions (at the time of bail) . Finally Hon HC quashes the RAPE case (now) against all relatives other than the boy and also imposes costs on the state government for illegal detention.
"….26. It is pertinent to note that though the offence was registered under section 376 and 417 IPC, the FIR does not spell out any allegations of rape against the petitioner Nos.3 and 4. The Investigating Officer has stated in her affidavit that on 4.04.2015 she had received an application from the Respondent no.2 alleging that the petitioners no.3 and 4 had threatened her and that she apprehends threat to her life. It may be mentioned that no crime has been registered against these petitioners for threatening the Respondent no.2. These petitioners were implicated in the crime only on the allegation that they had influenced the petitioner no.1 in calling off the marriage and had thereby committed an offence of cheating punishable under section 417 of the IPC. Based on these allegations, these petitioners were arrested on 8.06.2015….."
"…..27. It is pertinent to note that the offence under section 417 is bailable and is punishable with imprisonment for one year, or fine or both, despite which these two petitioners were arrested and remanded to custody from time to time. Needless to state that the power of arrest as well as the power to remand cannot be exercised in a casual manner….."
"…31. Reverting to the present case, though the Investigating officer has stated in the affidavit that the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the arrest of Accused were followed at the time of arrest, a perusal of the case diary reveals that the directions in Arnesh Kumar (supra) have not been followed. The concerned investigating officer had arrested the petitioners no.3 and 4 without ascertaining their complicity in the offence. Though the offence was bailable, these petitioners were produced before the Magistrate and remand was sought for "the purpose of ascertaining the reason for calling off the marriage, for verifying whether the other relatives were involved, to verify whether these petitioners were involved in cheating any other person and for arresting the co-accused Annasaheb Jadhav". The records reveal that the learned magistrate had also mechanically remanded them to custody from time to time without even ascertaining the nature of the allegations against these petitioners….."


FOLLOW on twitter or on wordpress or  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist

can we emulate the Japanes men ? can we shun marriage and avoid trouble ?

Indian MEN have to study the current Japanese "low baby" , "low marriage" syndrome.

After all Japan and India are Asian cultures and have very similar beliefs based on ahimsa, realisation etc ... Japanese men have learnt to protect themselves very well from feminists and now the gummint is arranging speed dating melas for them!! I'm sharing a video that explains the issue but does NOT talk about feminism or bad family courts as the prime cause !!! ( so filter out the superficial !! ) ... If someone has some concrete ideas on where to start plese share your thoughts

Husband can appoint agent 2 appear @ familycourt. need NOT appear in person all dates. Madras HC.

Husband can appoint agent to appear at family court. Need NOT appear in person for all dates. Madras HC.

This decision will be quite Useful for NRIs & other husbands living out of station and so struggling to travel etc.

In this case, the Hon Madras HC orders that a husband can appoint an agent who is not a lawyer to appear on husband's behalf.

However husband cannot completely be absent (later in the proceedings) because counseling between couples is possible only if parties appear in person. The Hon HC also quotes other cases where it is decided the power agent cannot be cross examined on intimate matters (i.e.) husband to appear only on those occasions.

The Hon HC says "…18. Thus, it is now well settled legal position that there is no legal impediment under the Family Courts Act, for a Power of Attorney to appear on behalf of the Principal and the only legal embargo is that the recognised agent should not be a legal practitioner. Any person, not being a legal practitioner, can be nominated as an agent under Order 3 Rule 2 CPC, to prosecute or defend the parties and until the Family Court passess any specific order, directing appearance of the party, depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case…."


FOLLOW on twitter or on wordpress or  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist

Parties may seek Exemption from personal appearance @ family court. Karnataka HC

USEFUL CASE for NRI and outstation husbands !!

Parties may seek Exemption from personal appearance @ family court. IF one side is already represented by counsel other side also to be allowed.Karnataka HC

In this case The husband sought leave of the Family Court to be represented through a Counsel. Court permitted husband to be represented by Counsel from inception of case. Wife who was at Mumbai gets a job and goes to USA. So she seeks both permission to be represented by counsel and exemption from personal appearance. Family court disallows both. Karnataka HC appreciates the facts and decrees that she can appear thru counsel

"10. There is nothing in Act or rules which prohibits a petition being filed by an authorised agent, or requires a petition should be presented by the petitioner in person. Therefore, there is no bar to a petition being presented to the Court by an agent (attorney holder). Even a Legal Practitioner who holds a power of attorney to present the petition, may 'present' a petition, but may not be able to 'represent' the petitioner in the proceedings unless permitted by the Family Court. Similarly, there is nothing in the Act or rules requiring the Family Court to refuse to recognise or accept the appearance of a respondent, through an authorised agent on the date fixed for appearance. A respondent can enter appearance through an authorised agent (who can also be a Legal Practitioner) with an application seeking permission to be represented by a Legal Practitioner…" and

"...11. A party may choose to appear through and be represented by an authorised agent other than a Legal Practitioner, in which event permis-sion under Section 13 is not necessary. A Family Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances, may of course make a specific order for the personal appearance of a party. Only if such an order is made, the party has to make an application for exemption from personal appearance if he/she is not in a position to appear in the matter. Even if the Family Court refuses permission to the parties to be represented by a Legal Practitioner, the parties may be represented by authorised agents other than a Legal Practitioner. But, if one side has been permitted to be represented by a Legal Practitioner, the Family Court should not refuse permission to the other side to be represented by a Legal Practitioner. To do so would be in violation of principles of natural justice…."

Since this procedure is gender neutral, Husbands should be able to use this to their benefit !!

More at

3.5 CRORES "settlement" 2 quash 498a,406! Submitted in memory of all who scream "..Marriage is scared..."

3crore 50lakhs ONLY to quash 498a,406 34 case. Submitted at the feet of all who say Marriage is scared

from the HC judgement we come to know

"… the respondent No.2 and the petitioner No.1 have amicably settled their disputes vide Memorandum of Mutual Understanding dated 03.03.2015, for a total sum of Rs.3,50,00,000/- (Three Crores Fifty Lakhs). As per the said settlement…."


"…12. Before parting with this order, I find force in the submission of learned APP for State regarding putting the petitioners to some terms. At this stage, petitioners No.1 and 2 have come forward and submitted that they are ready to contribute a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each for some welfare purposes.

13. Accordingly, the petitioners No. 1 and 2 are directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with the Delhi Police Martyrs Fund within two weeks from today. Proof thereof shall be furnished to the learned Trial Court under intimation to the Investigating Officer/SHO concerned…."

more at

No maintenance liability on Mother-in-law, brother-in-law !!.

Gujarat HC Hon. Pardiwala(J) saves MIL, BIL ordered 2 pay Maintenance in a DV case by sessions court.

Quashes maintenance order and clarifies that husband alone is liable to pay maintenance during his lifetime !

In this case a Sessions court orders Rs 9000 maintenance to a wife and says the husband, brother in law and mother in law are to pay the same!! (…allowed the appeal and directed the applicants and the husband to pay Rs.9,000=00 per month towards the maintenance ….).

Case reaches Gujarat HC. Hon Justice Padriwala appreciates the facts and orders "…From the principles enunciated in the above referred decisions, it is apparent that any right which the wife has during the subsistence of her marriage and during the lifetime of her husband is against the husband and she has no right to claim any relief against the father-in-law or sister-in-law or any of the relatives of her husband inasmuch as the obligation to maintain her lies only on her husband. The complaint in question, therefore, appears to have been filed with the malafide intention to wreak vengeance for the purpose of settling personal scores and would fall within the ambit of Illustration (7) of the Illustrations delineated by the Supreme Court in the celebrated case of State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604, viz. that the proceeding is manifestly attended with malafide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge……"

More at :