Daily Archives: May 21, 2017

Delhi Woman To Face Trial For Filing False Rape Case Against Her Dance Teacher – Indiatimes.com

Delhi Woman To Face Trial For Filing False Rape Case Against Her Dance Teacher

A Delhi court has ordered to initiate criminal proceedings against a woman for filing a false rape case.

Additional sessions judge Shail Jain while acquitting a man accused of rape and cheating, said it was clear from the woman’s testimony that she made a false complaint against him knowing fully well that he neither committed any offence against her nor he raped her on the false pretext of marriage.

Delhi court


“I am of the opinion that this is clear case of furnishing deliberate false information to the police, a public authority thereby making the police use it lawful authority to cause injury to the reputation of the accused persons,” the judge said.

The woman had filed a complaint with the police against the man alleging that he raped her repeatedly for nearly a year in 2016 on the false pretext of marriage.

However, in her testimony before the court, she said that in 2015, she had joined dance classes where the man was her teacher and they fell in love with each other and established physical relations with her consent.

Later, there was altercation between them after which she lodged the complaint against him.

Acquitting the accused the court noted that false rape charge humiliates a person and harms his reputation and a woman cannot escape criminal proceedings.

Delhi court


The court also hit out at the complaint for wasting is precious time. “Precious time of the court has been wasted in a false case…I deem it to be a fit case for making a court complaint against the prosecutrix… for furnishing false information to the police,” the judge noted.


Sec 125 Cr.P.C. Will override all personal laws

It has been observed by the Supreme Court that Section 125, Cr.P.C overrides the personal law if there is any conflict between the two. Although a Muslim man has right to have more than one wife yet Section 125, Cr.P.C. confers a right on the first wife to live separately if her husband contracts second marriage, and claim maintenance from him. 
In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court, this cannot be a valid ground to refuse maintenance to a Muslim wife that her husband can keep four wives at a time according to his personal law. The question cannot be seen in the light of a Muslim husband but it must be seen with reference to a right of his wife, who has been given right under Section 125, Cr.P.C._

Case :
Rajasthan high court

Mumtaz Begum vs Yusuf Khan on 5 November, 1998
Equivalent citations: 1999 CriLJ 322, 1999 (1) WLC 528
Author: G Gupta
Bench: G Gupta
ORDER G.L. Gupta, J.
1. This revision petition is directed against the order dt. 26-10-1996 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur whereby he dismissed the application of the petitioner under Section 125, Cr.P.C. holding that she has no just cause to live separately on the ground of contracting second marriage by her husband.
2. The undisputed facts are that petitioner-Mumtaz Begum was married to Yusuf Khan on 25-3-88. There was trouble in the marital relations. Yusuf Khan started keeping one Smt. Roshan Begum as his wife after performing ‘Nikah’. The petitioner filed an application under Section 125, Cr.P. C. stating that she was subjected to cruelty by her husband and as he has married again it was not possible for her to live with him and she was entitled to maintenance. The case set up by the husband-respondent was that he did not cause cruelty to the petitioner and she herself left the matrimonial home. The learned Judge, Family Court framed three issues which are to the following effect:-
(i) Whether petitioner-Mumtaz Begum is unable to maintain herself.
(ii) Whether respondent has sufficient means to provide maintenance to the petitioner.
(iii) Whether the respondent has neglected the petitioner.
3. Both the sides led oral evidence. The learned Judge found issues Nos. 1 and 2 in favour of the petitioner. Issue No. 3 was decided against the petitioner on the ground that a Muslim husband can have four wives at a time, and therefore, there is no just cause for the petitioner for not living with her husband. He, therefore, refused maintenance to her.
4. Mr. Acharya contended that on the basis of the Personal Law maintenance could not be denied to the petitioner under Section 125, Cr.P.C. He relied on the cases of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum AIR 1985 SC 945 : 1985 Cri LJ 875 and Begum Subanu alias Saira Banu v. A.M. Abdul Gafoor AIR 1987 SC 1103 : 1987 Cri LJ 980,
5. Mr. Gehlot, on the other hand, supported the order of the trial Court. According to him, the Personal Law permits a husband to have more than one wife and it cannot be just cause for a Muslim wife not to live with her husband on the ground that he has contracted second marriage.
6. I have carefully considered the above arguments. Conjugal house cannot be maintained and run smoothly unless both the spouses act with self-restraint and have respect for the feelings of each other. In matrimonial relations, it is expected of both the spouses to behave in such a fashion that one’s behaviour or conduct does not become an irritant or a source of mental agony to another. No self-respecting woman would like that her husband may contract a second marriage. If second, third or even fourth marriage is permissible under Mohamedan Law, a Mohamedan male may indulge in that luxury. For that he may not be liable for offence of bigamy, but if such a behaviour proves to be an irritant to his wife and if the same becomes a source of mental agony to her, he cannot take shelter under his Personal Law and say that he is not liable to pay maintenance to his wife living separately. The Explanation to Sub-section (3) of Section 125, Cr.P.C. does not make any difference between one party or the other. Nor is there any indication to show that it applies only to parties governed by the law of monogamy. The Criminal Procedure Code is a general law giving a summary and speedy relief to the destitute wife and children who are entitled to be maintained by the husband. One cannot read into the Explanation what is not found in it because some hardship of inconvenience is caused to a husband governed by the Personal Law.
7. The Apex Court in the case of Shah Bano (supra) has clearly held that the Explanation to the second proviso to Section 125(3), Cr.P.C. confers upon the wife the right to refuse to live with her husband if he contracts another marriage. It has been observed by the Supreme Court that Section 125, Cr.P.C. overrides the Personal Law, if there is any conflict between the two. The legal position has been stated in the case of Saira Banu (supra) which is reproduced hereunder at page 985 of Cri LJ :-
The Explanation places a second wife and a mistress on the same fooling and does not make any differentiation between them on the basis of their status under matrimonial law. If we ponder over the matter we can clearly visualise the reason for a second wife and a mistress being treated alike. The purpose of the Explanation is not to affect the rights of a Muslim husband to take more than one wife or to denigrate to as a legally married wife, as compared to a mistress but to place on an equal footing the matrimonial injury suffered by the first wife on account of the husband marrying again or taking a mistress during the subsistence of the marriage with her. From the point of view of the neglected wife, for whose benefit the Explanation has been provided, it will make no difference whether the woman intruding into her matrimonial life and taking her place in the matrimonial bed is another wife permitted under law to be married and not a mistress. The legal status of the woman to whom a husband has transferred his affections cannot lessen her distress or her feeling of neglect. In fact from one point of view the taking of another wife portends a more permanent destruction of her matrimonial life than the taking of a mistress by the husband.
x x x x x x The section is intended to wives and parents who are unable to maintain themselves. The three essential requisities to be satisfied before an order of maintenance can be passed are that: (1) the person liable to provide maintenance has sufficient means; (2) that he has neglected or refused to maintain; and (3) the dependent/ dependents is/are unable to maintain himself/ herself/themselves as the ease may be. The Legislature being anxious that for the sake of maintenance, the dependents should not resort to begging, stealing or cheating, etc. the liability to provide maintenance for children has been fixed on the basis of the paternity of the father and the minority of the child and in the case of major children on the basis of their physical handicap or mental abnormality without reference to factors of legitimacy or illegitimacy of the children and their being married or not. In the case of wives, whether their ties of marriage subsist or not, the anxiety of the Legislature is that they should not only not resort to begging, stealing or cheating, etc. but they should also not feel compelled, for the sake of maintaining themselves, to resort to an adulterous life or in the case of divorced women, to resort to marriage, if they have sentimental attachment to their earlier marriage and feel morally bound to observe their vows of fidelity to the persons whom they had married.
x x x x x x x x x Correspondingly a right has been conferred on the wife under the Explanation to live separately and claim maintenance from the husband, if he breaks his vows of fidelity and marries another woman or takes a mistress. As already stated it matters not whether the woman chosen by the husband to replace the wife is a legally married wife or a mistress. Therefore, the respondent’s contention that his taking another wife will not entitle the appellant to claim separate residence and maintenance cannot be substained. The Explanation is of uniform application to all wives including Muslim wives whose husbands have either married another wife or taken a mistress.
(Emphasis supplied)
8. The ratio of the above cases is that although a Muslim man has a right to have more than one wife yet Section 125, Cr.P.C. confers a right on the first wife to live separately if her husband contracts second marriage, and claims maintenance from him.
9. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Apex Court, this cannot be a valid ground to refuse maintenance to a Muslim wife that her husband can keep four wives at a time according to his Personal Law. The question cannot be seen in the light of the right of a Muslim husband but it mast be seen with reference to a right of his wife who has been given right under Section 125, Cr.P.C. The learned Judge of the Family Court has obviously erred when he rejected the application of the petitioner. The application deserves to be allowed.
10. Consequently, this revision petition is allowed. The order of the trial Court is set aside. Though evidence has been led by the parties on She quantum of maintenance allowance, yet the trial Court has not determined the maintenance. Therefore, the case is remanded to the trial Court with a direction to decide the question of quantum of maintenance allowance within two months.
Mumtaz Begum vs Yusuf Khan on 5 November, 1998

Kerala HC Acquits Man Convicted For ‘Raping’ A ‘Well-Educated’ Lady On The Pretext Of Marriage

Kerala HC Acquits Man Convicted For ‘Raping’ A ‘Well-Educated’ Lady On The Pretext Of Marriage [Read Judgment]

Even a common lady or an uneducated lady cannot be deceived more than once or twice on a promise of marriage, said the Court.

The Kerala High Court has acquitted a man convicted for ‘raping’ a 27-year-old ‘well-educated’ woman by giving false promise of marriage.

Justice P Ubaid found it quite unbelievable that an engineering graduate could be easily deceived on a marriage promise on many occasions, three or four of which were at her residence, when her parents were away.

“Even a common lady or an uneducated lady cannot be deceived more than once or twice on a promise of marriage,” the court said.

The allegation against the accused was that he took the lady to a hotel at Ernakulam, where he subjected her to sexual intercourse in a room with force, and thereafter, on three occasions at her residence also he, thus, subjected the lady to sexual intercourse on a promise that he would marry her. The sessions court convicted the accused for seven years’ imprisonment.

Referring to an e-mail conversation between the accused and the lady, the court observed that the intimacy or affair between them was really illicit and unholy, and that as part of this affair, she had submitted herself to him on many occasions with full consent and will.

“When some difference of opinion cropped up, or when the accused retracted from the affair for reasons known to them alone, she made a complaint alleging rape,” the court said, holding that the trial court wrongly convicted the accused.

Taking a similar stand, the Delhi High Court had ruled that if a woman consents to have sexual relations with a married man, who promises to marry her, continues the relationship and gets impregnated, then it is an act of “promiscuity” and not ‘rape’.

Read the Judgment Here

This article has been made possible because of financial support from Independent and Public-Spirited Media Foundation.


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.


Party has absolute right to appoint or terminate advocate. NOC Not required. KAR HC