Vinayak's bLog

Use the power of technology to get information on court cases... Hope this helps our brothers

We welcome Solar trains in India. We have ample sunlight around the year in most parts of our country & should use it. Looking forward to the day when polluting, costly imported fuel will NOT be needed

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5427907/Indian-state-offers-women-free-cosmetic-surgery.html#ixzz580NsbkLj

Wife CANNOT claim maintenance under 125 CRPC & DV for same acts !! Madras HC | my2centsworth NO #DOUBLE #MAINTENANCE !!! Wife #CANNOT claim maintenance under sec 125 CRPC and sec 20 of DV on same set of facts / Same alleged acts !! Madras HC CLASSIC ----------------- If the wife wants an order under Section 20 of the Act, in addition to the order under Section 125 of the Code, she has to prove fresh acts of the husband constituting the domestic violence subsequent to the passing of the earlier order under Section 125 of the Code. She cannot rely on the acts of the husband constituting domestic violence, which happened prior to the passing of the order under Section 125 of the Code. For getting an order under Section 20 of the Act, in addition to the earlier order under Section 125 of the Code, the wife should plead and prove that subsequent to the said order made under Section 125 of the Code, the husband had caused domestic violence and on account of the same, she had suffered loss and thus, she is entitled for additional amount as maintenance. Thus, it is manifestly clear that a previous order made under Section 125 of the Code is not a bar for an aggrieved wife to approach a Magistrate under Section 20 of the Act, for monetary relief as an additional relief of maintenance, provided subsequent to the passing of the earlier order under under Section 125 of the Code, the husband has committed domestic violence resulting loss to the wife.

NO #DOUBLE #MAINTENANCE !!! Wife #CANNOT claim maintenance under sec 125 CRPC and sec 20 of DV on same set of facts / Same alleged acts !! Madras HC CLASSIC ----------------- If the wife wants an order under Section 20 of the Act, in addition to the order under Section 125 of the Code, she has to prove fresh acts of the husband constituting the domestic violence subsequent to the passing of the earlier order under Section 125 of the Code. She cannot rely on the acts of the husband constituting domestic violence, which happened prior to the passing of the order under Section 125 of the Code. For getting an order under Section 20 of the Act, in addition to the earlier order under Section 125 of the Code, the wife should plead and prove that subsequent to the said order made under Section 125 of the Code, the husband had caused domestic violence and on account of the same, she had suffered loss and thus, she is entitled for additional amount as maintenance. Thus, it is manifestly clear that a previous order made under Section 125 of the Code is not a bar for an aggrieved wife to approach a Magistrate under Section 20 of the Act, for monetary relief as an additional relief of maintenance, provided subsequent to the passing of the earlier order under under Section 125 of the Code, the husband has committed domestic violence resulting loss to the wife.

Man pleads for life as woman beats him to death !! Sad sick state in india

Woman divorces husband by triple Talaq after falling in love with brother-in-law | Gulfnews.com Woman divorces husband after falling in love with brother-in-law 😳😳😳 She issues a triple talaq over the phone at a time debate is raging over continuation of the practice By Lata Rani Correspondent 17:02 May 20, 2017 Patna: A woman in Bihar divorced her husband by uttering the word ‘talaq’ three times over the phone on Friday after falling in love with her brother-in-law. The woman served the instant divorce in the presence of a village court which had been convened to look into the matter, at Rajajan village, Khagaria district, some 170km east of Patna. The case comes amid a raging debate in India over the continuation of the Islamic practice of ‘triple talaq’. The woman, Rozida Khatoon, was unhappy with her husband Mohammad Junail and the couple were living apart for extended periods of time owing to Junail’s efforts to earn a livelihood. In his absence, Khatoon drew close to her brother-in-law, Mohammad Nasir, and the two fell in love. As news of their affair reached the ears of local villagers, they reported the matter to the local village court, which met Friday to decide their fate. At the court, Khatoon called Junail and divorced him instantly after uttering the word ‘talaq’ three times. She stunned the court by announcing her intention to stay with Nasir, a father of four children. “I love him [Nasir] and want to stay with him,” Khatoon told the court. When asked to present his position, Nasir agreed to accept Khatoon as his wife and declared that he would ensure the peace between both his wives. The court allowed them to stay together but informed Nasir that he would be held responsible in the event of any dispute between his wives. The incident comes barely three days after the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board reportedly told the Supreme Court that the women too can give talaq. “The woman can also negotiate in the Nikah Nama [a binding contract and a fundamental element of an Islamic marriage] and include provisions therein consistent with Islamic law to contractually stipulate that her husband does not resort to triple talaq, she has right to pronounce triple talaq in all forms, and ask for very high ‘mehr’ amount in case of talaq and impose such other conditions as are available to her in order to protect her dignity,” the Muslim law board was quoted as saying in The Times of India. A five-judge constitutional bench of the Supreme Court that was hearing a bunch of petitions seeking an end to the practice has reserved its ruling. The court concluded its hearing in the case in a record six days. http://m.gulfnews.com/news/asia/india/woman-divorces-husband-after-falling-in-love-with-brother-in-law-1.2030129

Party has absolute right to appoint or terminate advocate. NOC not required. KARNATAKA HC

1000s at Jantar Mantar !! Men's rights are human rights!! #Satyagrah4MEN

1000s at Jantar Mantar !! Men's rights are human rights!! #Satyagrah4MEN

1000s at Jantar Mantar !! Men's rights are human rights!! #Satyagrah4MEN

Marriage is becoming a big time gamble. Now husbands will have to pay maintenance EVEN 2 deserting wives The Hon #Supreme #Court has said that even #Deserting #wives are eligible to get #maintenance from their #husbands !!! News reports state that, This is a Judgement delivered by a bench of Hon SC & is expected to supersede the consistent line maintained by various courts over last three decades (refusing alimony for deserting women) * I request all senior citizens to open their eyes and realise what sort of loot and plunder their sons will be put to. * #marriage is no longer the social norm you are accustomed to. Marriage is no longer a security. Marriage is a bit time #gamble in India. * I have not yet read the actual judgement, but going by news reports, I feel This this epoch making. This is #monumental. One may even call this a turning point in Indian Judicial history. * Wake up ladies and gentlemen, wake up senior citizens, wake up son's of India... Marriage is becoming plunder and loot in open day light. Failed marriages are a major disaster. They will drain you monetarily, mentally, psychologically and physically...

Home / News / Hyderabad / Ayesha Meera rape case: Babu acquitted after 8 years in jail for no crime AYESHA MEERA RAPE CASE: BABU ACQUITTED AFTER 8 YEARS IN JAIL FOR NO CRIME April 1, 2017 Hyderabad, News, Top Stories 0 Comments Hyderabad: In a sensational decision, a Division Bench of the Hyderabad High Court comprising Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy and Justice M.S.K. Jaiswal on Friday acquitted Pidathala Satyam Babu for the rape and murder of B. Pharmacy student Ayesha Meera 11 years ago, and ordered police to pay Rs 1 lakh in costs to the defendant for lapses in the probe and arresting an innocent man. It claimed that the prosecution failed to produce evidence to prove that the appellant raped the victim and then killed her. The bench observed that the story of rape was created by the police as they have pressure from organisations and associations to nab the culprit. The bench also felt that the police brought in the theory of rape to protect the real culprits. Ayesha’s parents also alleged that police were making Sathyam Babu a scapegoat to close the case guarding the true culprits. Reprimanding the police officers the bench directed initiation of proceedings against these officers. It also criticised the trial court for believing in the police without looking into the lapses in the investigation. 17-year-old, Ayesha Meera was raped and murdered, on December 27, 2007. Her body was found in a pool of blood. As there was no progress in the case, massive agitations were taken up demanding the arrest of the culprits. Subsequently, as many as four people were taken into custody and questioned for several days. Sathyam Babu was nabbed by the police in August 2008. After trial, the Women Special Sessions Court sentenced life imprisonment and 10 years rigorous imprisonment to Sathyam Babu. Challenging the court verdict, Sathyam Babu filed a petition in High Court. After eight years, the High Court acquitted Sathyam Babu. It must also be noted that Mr. Babu, is physically handicapped. Deccan Chronicle in its report stated, the bench pointed to anomalies like the police claim that the appellant scaled an eight-foot wall twice with a pedestal in one hand to kill the victim who was sleeping on the second floor of the hostel. “It is unbelievable,” the bench observed, that a man weighing 50 kg and physically challenged, can scale an eight-foot wall with a single hand. The bench said it cannot accept the theory that the appellant entered the room without disturbing the victim’s roommates, committed rape and murder, dragged the body to the toilet and wrote on her body. Meanwhile people’s organisations, Muslim welfare associations and Sathyam Babu’s family members demanded reinvestigation into the murder to catch the real culprits.

Justice Karnan hits back at SC, says targeted because he’s Dalit The Supreme Court had issued a warrant order on Friday, directing Karnan’s presence on March31 after the judge ignored earlier summons. (PTI) Updated: Mar 11, 2017 06:48 IST By HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times, Kolkata Calcutta high court justice C S Karnan hit back at the Supreme Court on Friday, calling its warrant against him “unconstitutional” and “an attempt to ruin” his life as he was a Dalit. “I am being targeted as I am a Dalit. This is a caste issue. The order has been deliberately issued against me. This is an attempt to ruin my life. The warrant is unconstitutional,” Karnan told the media at a hurriedly organised press conference at his residence in New Town. A seven-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India JS Khehar had issued the warrant order earlier in the day, directing Karnan’s presence on March 31 after the judge ignored earlier summons in connection with contempt proceedings initiated against him for accusing several judges of the Madras high court, where he had earlier served, and an SC judge of corruption, nepotism and casteism. The SC said the warrant should be executed through West Bengal director general of police. Justice Karnan also signed an order in front of reporters, directing the Central Bureau of Investigation to “register, investigate and file a report before the appropriate court of law under Article 226 read with Section 482 CrPC to prevent abuse of process of any court....” In the same order, he also said: “I further direct the secretary generals of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha to place the entire facts of the case before the Speaker for appropriate inquiry under the Judges’ Enquiry Act.”

NATIONAL Arrest me, imprison me, Karnan dares SC Krishnadas Rajagopal NEW DELHI: MARCH 31, 2017 13:49 IST UPDATED: APRIL 01, 2017 00:59 IST Justice Karnan accuses the Supreme Court of robbing him of dignity. In an openly confrontational hearing, controversial Calcutta High Court judge, Justice C.S. Karnan on Friday challenged a seven judge Bench of the Supreme Court to “arrest and put him in jail” for contempt. Countering an order of the Bench led by Chief Justice of India J.S. Khehar to file an affidavit explaining his disparaging remarks and allegations of corruption against fellow High Courts and Supreme Court judges, Justice Karnan accused the Bench of robbing him of his mental and physical balance and his dignity by stripping him of his judicial and administrative powers as a High Court judge. Justice Karnan was appearing for the first time before the Bench in the contempt action against him. He had refused to appear before it despite repeated notice from the apex court summoning him. Finally, the court had to issue a bailable warrant against him, which was served on him by a police team led by the West Bengal Director General of Police. Justice Karnan, appearing for himself in a packed courtroom, shouted at the Bench that he will not come before it again. “Had I not come today, you would have issued non-bailable warrant against me... What way am I an offender or an anti-social element or a terrorist for you... you should protect my dignity, my personal life has been destroyed, police entered my colony and people are watching me,” Justice Karnan submitted. “We issued bailable warrants against you Mr. Karnan not because you were an accused but because you did not enter procedure. You are not a terrorist,” Chief Justice Khehar responded. When the court gave Justice Karnan the choice between rendering an unconditional apology for his scurrilous letters and accusations against the judiciary, Justice Karnan rebutted saying they should first restore his powers as a judge in order for him to be in a position to prove his allegations. The allegations of Justice Karnan had prompted the contempt action — the first in the court's history against a sitting High Court judge. Finally, after a 45-minute hearing, Chief Justice Khehar recorded that Justice Karnan was replying neither coherently nor affirmatively about the accusations he had made, thus giving him an option to pen them down in an affidavit to be filed in the next four weeks. The court refused his plea to restore his judicial and administrative duties. “I have lost my physical and mental balance... If you do not restore my work, you can very well now impose any punishment you want,” Justice Karnan said. “If you feel you are not mentally fit to respond to us in an affidavit, you give us a medical certificate,” Chief Justice Khehar replied. “Medical certificate is not required. You have disturbed me like anything,” Justice Karnan told the Bench. The hearing started with Justice Karnan explaining that his “fight is not against judiciary or for personal gains”. “My fight is against corruption,” Justice Karnan submitted, handing over a letter concerning allegations against 20 judges to the Bench. “You think about what you want to say. If you want legal help, I suggest you take legal advice. You should be properly prepared,” Justice Jasti Chelameswar asked. “If you unconditionally apologise, this matter will take a different course. If you choose to accuse 'a' or 'y', the matter will be adjudicated,” Justice Dipak Misra observed. The Bench also comprised Justices Ranjan Gogoi, Madan B. Lokur, P.C. Ghose and Kurian Joseph. When the Chief Justice asked Attorney-General Mukul Rohatgi whether Justice Karnan was in a position to comprehend his predicament, he said there was no question of “non-comprehension” here. “This gentleman has appeared before My Lords and affirmed and again affirmed that he will continue to make insinuations till the judicial institution is damned. He says ‘I will render unconditional apology if I have committed contempt’. Apology for contempt cannot be conditional,” Mr. Rohatgi submitted. × Meanwhile, in a separate petition filed by Madras HC, Justice Karnan said he has returned his official bungalow. The next hearing is on May 1, 2017.

Will courts ALSO save #mothers #sisters from #498a bandits #DV #terrorists or is law only for young wives and #girlfriends ??