Author Archives: vinayak

About vinayak

Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist

Husband ready 2 keep 498a wife with FULL dignity !! but wife wants #alimony, #money #Moolah so mediation again !!

  • Wife files 498a, and sec 3 , 4 of DP act case
  • In spite of ALL the defamation etc., Husband accepts to keep the wife
  • but wife says she wants only #alimony, #money #Moolah
  • so the Honourable courts sends them all back to mediation !!
  • This case stands out as a great example of the inner meaning of marriage these days and matrimonial CRIMINAL cases !!

======================================================

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.15921 of 2016

  1. Guria Kaur @ Simran Wife of Sri Amandeep Singh Bagga, Daughter of Sri Mahendra Singh Resident of Qr. No. 42, Punjabi Colony, Chitkohra Bazar, P.S. – Gardanibagh, District – Patna …. …. Petitioner/s

Versus

  1. The State of Bihar
  2. Amandeep Singh Bagga Son of Sri Kulwant Singh Bagga Residing at Mohalla – Raghunath Tola, Anishabad, P.S. – Gardanibagh, Dist. – Patna. …. …. Opposite Party/s

======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abinash Kumar, Advocate

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kr.Singh 1(App)

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH

ORAL ORDER

4 17-08-2016

The present application has been filed for modification of the order dated 10.03.2016, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 11901 of 2016, whereby the opposite party no. 2 being the husband of the complainant was granted provisional anticipatory bail for a period of six months in a complaint case in which processes have been directed to be issued after cognizance being taken for the offences punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The provisional anticipatory bail was granted on the ground of the statement made in para-12 of the petition that opposite party no. 2 is ready to keep the complainant with full honour and grace as his wife and has also filed Matrimonial Suit No. 116 of 2015 for restitution of conjugal life, but the complainant has filed the present modification application since she wants to resolve the issue in terms of permanent alimony.

As jointly prayed for, let this matter be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of the Bihar State Legal Services Authority.

At the first instance, both the opposite party no. 2 and the complainant shall appear before the Medication Centre on 5th of September, 2016 along with the order of this Court and other relevant documents, thereafter the Mediation Centre will fix further dates.

Put up this matter before this Court on 24th of October, 2016 at 4.15 P.M. in Chambers.

Since, vide order dated 10.03.2016 opposite party no. 2 was granted provisional anticipatory bail for six months, let it be extended till 9th of November, 2016.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) P.K./-

U T

 

 

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.


CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting


wife & paramour BRUTALLY beat & kill visually challenged husband ! Coimbatore, TN

Coimbatore. Tamil Nadu.

Wife and Paramour beat, stab & kill visually challenged husband. Her Paramour and another guy (friend ?) join beating the guy when he is asleep. They then throw the dead body in the garbage behind the house. Next day morning she acts as if husband is missing. Finally matters come out in police questioning😦

புருஷனுக்குக் கண்ணு சரியா தெரியலை.. கள்ளக்காதல் “கண்ணை மறைக்க” அடித்துக் கொன்ற மனைவி!

By: Sutha

Published: Thursday, August 11, 2016, 11:47 [IST]

கோவை: கோவை அருகே சரியாக கண் பார்வை இல்லாத கணவரை வெறுத்து வந்த மனைவி கொடூரமாக அவரை அடித்துக் கொன்ற செயல் பரபரப்பை ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளது. அவர் கணவரை கொலை செய்வதற்கு கள்ளக்காதலும் ஒரு காரணமாம். போலீஸார் அந்தப் பெண்ணையும், அவரது கள்ளக்காதலனையும் கைது செய்துள்ளனர்.

இருகூர் ஜெயஸ்ரீ நகரைச் சேர்ந்தவர் 35 வயதான சக்திவேல். இவரது மனைவி பெயர் சாரதா. 30 வயதாகும் சாரதாவுக்கு கணவருடன் ஆரம்பத்திலிருந்தே ஒத்துப் போகவில்லை. இருப்பினும் இந்தத் தம்பதிக்கு 6 வயது மகளும், 5 வயதில் மகனும் உள்ளனர்.

சக்திவேலுக்கு கண் பார்வை சற்று குறைவு, மேலும் சாரதாவை விட குறைவாகவே படித்துள்ளார். இதனால் கணவரை எப்போதுமே மட்டமாகவே நினைப்பாராம்.

இ்த நிலையில் வீட்டிலேயே செல்லப் பிராணிகளை வளர்த்து விற்கும் நிறுவனத்தை நடத்தி வந்தார் சாரதா. அதில் ராம் என்பவரும் இணைந்து செயல்பட்டார். அதில் இருவருக்கும் தொடர்பாக கள்ளக்காதலில் திளைத்து வந்தனர்.

இந்த நிலையில் ராமுடன் நிரந்தரமாக செட்டிலாக நினைத்த சாரதா, சக்திவேலை கொலை செய்ய முடிவெடுத்தார். அதற்கு ராமும் தூபம் போட்டார். சம்பவத்தன்று நள்ளிரவு தனது வீட்டுக்கு ராமை வரவழைத்தார் சாரதா. ராமுடன் அவரது நிறுவனத்தில் வேலை பார்க்கும் கிருஷ்ணா என்பவரும் உடன் வந்தார். வீட்டில் தூங்கிக் கொண்டிருந்த சக்திவேலை இந்த மூவரும் சேர்ந்து கட்டையால் சரமாரியாக அடித்தும், கத்தியால் குத்தியும் கொடூரமாகக் கொலை செய்துள்ளனர். பின்னர் உடலை துணியில் சுற்றி வீட்டுக்குப் பின்னால் இருந்த தொட்டியில வீசி விட்டனர்.

அடுத்த நாள் காலை தனது கணவரைக் காணவில்லை என்று கூறி சிங்காநல்லூர் காவல் நிலையத்தில் புகார் கொடுத்தார் சாரதா. ஆனால் போலீஸார் விசாரணையில் இறங்கியபோது உண்மை வெளியானது. இதையடுத்து சாரதாவைப் போலீஸார் கைது செய்தனர். ராம், கிருஷ்ணா தலைமறைவாகி விட்டனர். அவர்களைப் போலீஸார் தீவிரமாக தேடி வருகின்றனர்.

Read more at: http://tamil.oneindia.com/news/tamilnadu/wife-arrested-murdering-her-husband-260016.html

 

Fellow marries 3rd time & 3rd wife files 498 etc on him ! Rajesh Gupta @ Pappu vs The State (Nct Of Delhi)

Just 2 lines explain this case  !!🙂🙂

“….marriage was solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 on 10.03.2008. The complainant was the third wife of the petitioner. ….”
“….  It is also agreed that petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs. 3.4 Lacs (‘Settlement Amount’) to respondent no.2 in full and final settlement towards all her claims arising out of the marriage between them including maintenance (past, present and future), permanent alimony, istridhan and dowry articles. …”

If marriage is a gamble, what’s THIRD marriage ??

*   IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+   CRL.M.C. 1912/2016

Date of Decision: July 25th, 2016

RAJESH GUPTA @ PAPPU                        ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr.Roshan Saini, Advocate

versus

THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR              ….. Respondent
Through: Mr. G.M. Farooqui, Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State with Sub- Inspector Dharmender Kumar,
Police Station Roop Nagar, Delhi
Respondent No. 2 in person.

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.TEJI

P.S.TEJI, J.

  1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sh. Rajesh Gupta @ Pappu for quashing of FIR No.138/2011 dated 23.09.2011, under Sections 498-A/406 IPC registered at Police Station Roop Nagar on the basis of the mediation report of the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in view of the settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no.2, namely, Ms. Meenu on 03.09.2015.
  2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submitted that the respondent No.2, present in the Court has been identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question by her counsel.
  3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the marriage was solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 on 10.03.2008. The complainant was the third wife of the petitioner. The in-laws of the complainant used to torture her physically and mentally. Despite several attempts, the complainant’s complaint was not lodged by the Police at Mundawar Police Station and instead, the police personnel would call the in-laws of the complainant to take away the complainant back to their home. The complainant was given several life threats by her in-laws and her father was tortured by her in-laws with new demands for one thing or the other. Thereafter, the complainant got lodged the complaint following which the FIR in question was registered against the petitioner. During the pendency of the proceedings, the matter was settled between the accused person and the respondent no.2.http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; https://twitter.com/ATMwithDick
  4. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. As per the mediation report, it is agreed between the parties that the petitioner and respondent no.2 shall take divorce by way of mutual consent. It is also agreed that petitioner shall pay a sum of Rs. 3.4 Lacs (‘Settlement Amount’) to respondent no.2 in full and final settlement towards all her claims arising out of the marriage between them including maintenance (past, present and future), permanent alimony, istridhan and dowry articles. It is agreed that the petitioner shall pay the above mentioned amount in the manner enunciated in the terms of the mediation report. It is agreed that out of the Settlement Amount, Rs.1.4 Lacs shall be paid at the time of quashing of the FIR in question before this Court. It is also agreed that the petition for quashing the FIR in question shall be filed by the petitioner and respondent no.2 shall cooperate with the petitioner for the same, as and when necessary, by filing an affidavit for the same. It is also agreed that the quashing petition shall be filed within 1 month from the date of disposal of petition under Section 13 (B) (2) of H.M.A. It is also agreed that the respondent no.2 shall withdraw the case under Section 12 of D.V. Act along with execution petition after disposal of the petition under Section 13(B)(1) of HMA. It is also agreed that the petitioner shall withdraw his divorce petition titled “Rajesh Gupta vs. Meenu Gupta” bearing No. H.M.A. No. 1/15, pending before the Court of Sh. D.S. Punia, Ld. Principal Judge (Central), Family Court, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi within 15 days from today. It is also agreed that the parties shall not file any further cases or complaints, in future, against each other or each other’s families. It is also agreed that the parties shall not interfere in each other’s lives after the settlement. Respondent No.2 affirmed the contents of the aforesaid settlement and of her affidavit dated 16.05.2016 supporting this petition. In the affidavit, she has stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. All the disputes and differences have been resolved through mutual consent. Now no dispute with petitioner survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end. Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded in this regard in which she stated that she has entered into a compromise with the petitioner and has settled all the disputes with him. She further stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.
  5. In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, by observing as under:-
    • “61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”
  6. The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in a recent judgment in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466. The relevant observations of the Apex Court in Narinder Singh (Supra) are as under:-
    • “29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:
    • 29.1 Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
    • 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:  (i) ends of justice, or  (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.
    • 29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.
    • 29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
  7. The inherent powers of the High Court ought to be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice. The respondent no.2 agrees to the quashing of the FIR in question without any threat or coercion or undue influence and has stated that the matter has been settled out of her own free will. As the matter has been settled and compromised amicably, so, there would be an extraordinary delay in the process of law if the legal proceedings between the parties are carried on. So, this Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent the abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice.
  8. The incorporation of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is meant to deal with the situation in the absence of express provision of law to secure the ends of justice such as, where the process is abused or misused; where the ends of justice cannot be secured; where the process of law is used for unjust or unlawful object; to avoid the causing of harassment to any person by using the provision of Cr.P.C. or to avoid the delay of the legal process in the delivery of justice. Whereas, the inherent power is not to be exercised to circumvent the express provisions of law.
  9. It is settled law that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra through CBI v. Vikram Anatrai Doshi and Ors. MANU/SC/0842/2014 and in the case of Inder Singh Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal MANU/SC/0808/2009 has observed that powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. must be exercised sparingly, carefully and with great caution. Only when the Court comes to the conclusion that there would be manifest injustice or there would be abuse of the process of the Court if such power is not exercised, Court would quash the proceedings.
  10. It is a well settled law that where the High Court is convinced that the offences are entirely personal in nature and therefore do not affect public peace or tranquility and where it feels that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice, it should not hesitate to quash them. In such cases, pursuing prosecution would be waste of time and energy. Non-compoundable offences are basically an obstruction in entering into compromise. In certain cases, the main offence is compoundable but the connected offences are not. In the case of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another 2003 (4) SCC 675 the Hon’ble Apex Court observed that even though the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not apply to such offences which are not compoundable, it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Hon’ble Apex Court laid down that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. In the nutshell, the Hon’ble Apex Court justified the exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice in view of the special facts and circumstances of the case, even where the offences were non- compoundable. In the light of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that notwithstanding the fact the offence under Section 498A IPC is a non- compoundable offence, there should be no impediment in quashing the FIR under this section, if the Court is otherwise satisfied that the facts and circumstances of the case so warrant.http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; https://twitter.com/ATMwithDick
  11. The Courts in India are now normally taking the view that endeavour should be taken to promote conciliation and secure speedy settlement of disputes relating to marriage and family affairs such as, matrimonial disputes between the couple or/and between the wife and her in-laws. India being a vast country naturally has large number of married persons resulting into high numbers of matrimonial disputes due to differences in temperament, life-styles, opinions, thoughts etc. between such couples, due to which majority is coming to the Court to get redressal. In its 59th report, the Law Commission of India had emphasized that while dealing with disputes concerning the family, the Court ought to adopt an approach radically different from that adopted in ordinary civil proceedings and that it should make reasonable efforts at settlement before the commencement of the trial. Further it is also the constitutional mandate for speedy disposal of such disputes and to grant quick justice to the litigants. But, our Courts are already over burdened due to pendency of large number of cases because of which it becomes difficult for speedy disposal of matrimonial disputes alone. As the matrimonial disputes are mainly between the husband and the wife and personal matters are involved in such disputes, so, it requires conciliatory procedure to bring a settlement between them. Nowadays, mediation has played a very important role in settling the disputes, especially, matrimonial disputes and has yielded good results. The Court must exercise its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to put an end to the matrimonial litigations at the earliest so that the parties can live peacefully.
  12. Since the subject matter of this FIR is essentially matrimonial, which now stands mutually and amicably settled between the parties, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility and is a fit case for this Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction.
  13. In the facts and circumstances of this case, in view of statement made by the respondent No.2 and the compromise arrived at between the parties, the FIR in question warrants to be put to an end and proceedings emanating thereupon need to be quashed.
  14. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and FIR No.138/2011 dated 23.09.2011, under Sections 498-A/406 IPC registered at Police Station Roop Nagar and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed against the petitioner.
  15. This petition is accordingly disposed of.
    (P.S.TEJI)
    JUDGE
    JULY 25, 2016
    dd

=============================disclaimer==================================

This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.

CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting

After 12.5 lakhs & mutual agreed, SC transfers case 2 wife’s city. Orders 5 lakhs upfront pmt (b4 divorce)

We see that the courts are filled with compassion when it comes to family matters, especially matters concerning women ! Here is a case where a divorcee woman marries a bachelor. Soon differences crop and matters reach court. At SC, thru mediation, husband agrees to pay Rs 12.5 Lakhs to wife and they agree to mutual consent divorce. But but ….. the Hon SC comes to know that the wife is suffering from breast cancer. So the Hon SC is worried that the divorce is obtained due to (wife’s situation ) compulsion and so the Hon SC asks the husband to pay Rs 5 Lakhs EVEN WITHOUT divorce and tarnsfers cases to wife’s city – Hyderabad, orders the family court at Hyderabad to take up the matter afresh and adjudicate !!

================================

Excerpts :

=> “…The transfer petition was listed before this Court on 28.08.2015, when, at the request of the counsel for the parties, the matter was referred to Supreme Court Mediation Centre for amicable settlement. …” and “… the respondent-husband agreed to pay Rs.12,50,000/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) towards full and final settlement as alimony, maintenance for past and future or any other claim of the petitioner. The respondent-husband had agreed to pay the said amount of Rs.12,50,000/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Thousand only), by way of Bank draft in the name of the Registrar, Supreme Court, ...”
=> However the court is infromed of the wife’s condition ..i.e. “… the document i.e. the medical certificate, reveals that a lump in the breast was found which highly suggests malignancy. The doctors recommended for an immediate surgery and chemotherapy ranging from 6 to 8 cycles of adjuvant. It is mentioned that approximate costs per cycle will cost about Rs. 50,000/- …”
=> Since Hindu marriage is sacred “…Hindu marriage is a sacred and holy union of husband and wife by virtue of which the wife is completely transplanted in the household of her husband and takes a new birth. It is a combination of bone to bone and flesh to flesh….”
=> and the court orders as follows “..(i) The transfer petition for the transfer of matrimonial suit being petition No.A-642 of 2015 pending before the Family Court at Bombay, Maharashtra to Family Court at Hyderabad is allowed. …. (ii) The respondent-husband shall pay a sum of Rs.Five Lacs (Rs.5,00,000/-) out of Rs.12,50,000/- to the petitioner-wife immediately within a week for her treatment and meeting other medical expenses. (iii) After the petitioner is fully cured from the disease or within six months whichever is earlier, the Family Court at Hyderabad, where the divorce petition is ordered to be transferred, shall take up the case along with a fresh application that may be filed by the parties …….. the Family Court at Hyderabad shall dispose of those petitions in accordance with law after recording its satisfaction and giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties….”

================================

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 702 OF 2015

Vennangot Anuradha Samir …..Petitioner

versus

Vennangot Mohandas Samir …Respondent

O R D E R

M.Y. EQBAL, J.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records along with the affidavits and petitions.

  1. Admittedly, the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized in April, 2010 according to Hindu Vedic Rites. At the time of marriage, the respondent-husband was a bachelor and the petitioner-wife was a divorcee. It was a love marriage after both of them came in contact with each other in October, 2006. In 2013, some misunderstanding developed between the petitioner and the respondent as a result of which the petitioner left the house.
  2. In 2015, the respondent-husband filed a suit for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(1a) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground that the petitioner-wife after solemnization of the marriage had committed various acts of cruelty. Admittedly, the petitioner is living in Hyderabad with her parents. The petitioner, therefore, moved an application before this Court for transfer of divorce suit pending before the Family Court Bombay to the Family Court at Hyderabad.

  3. The transfer petition was listed before this Court on 28.08.2015, when, at the request of the counsel for the parties, the matter was referred to Supreme Court Mediation Centre for amicable settlement. Before the Mediation Centre, a Settlement Agreement was filed on 26.10.2015. In terms of the said Settlement Agreement, the respondent-husband agreed to pay Rs.12,50,000/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) towards full and final settlement as alimony, maintenance for past and future or any other claim of the petitioner. The respondent-husband had agreed to pay the said amount of Rs.12,50,000/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Thousand only), by way of Bank draft in the name of the Registrar, Supreme Court, which shall be paid to the petitioner-wife at the time of passing of decree of divorce by mutual consent. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; https://twitter.com/ATMwithDick

  4. On 6 th November, 2015, the case was again listed along with the office report and Settlement Agreement. The matter was adjourned to enable the parties to file appropriate application.

  5. Consequently, an application was filed purported to be under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act with a prayer to treat the divorce petition pending before the Family Court, Bombay as an application under Section 13B of the Act and treat the present application as second motion and grant divorce by way of mutual consent.

  6. In the said application it was mentioned that petitioner-wife is suffering life threatening disease and urgently requires funds for her medical treatment and also that she has to depend on herself for proper care.

  7. On 17.11.2015, the case was adjourned at the request of the petitioner-wife, to enable her to file additional documents in support of her case that she is suffering with life threatening disease. In compliance thereof additional documents have been brought on record.

  8. Perusal of the document i.e. the medical certificate, reveals that a lump in the breast was found which highly suggests malignancy. The doctors recommended for an immediate surgery and chemotherapy ranging from 6 to 8 cycles of adjuvant. It is mentioned that approximate costs per cycle will cost about Rs. 50,000/-.

  9. From the above mentioned admitted facts, it is evident that the petitioner needs sufficient amount of money for the treatment of breast cancer. Hence, it cannot be ruled out that in order to save her life by getting money, she agreed for a settlement of dissolution of marriage. On these facts, a question that came in our mind is as to whether the Court would be justified in granting a decree for divorce on the basis of settlement when the wife is suffering with breast cancer and is in need of money for her treatment and can that be the consideration for dissolution of marriage.

  10. Hindu marriage is a sacred and holy union of husband and wife by virtue of which the wife is completely transplanted in the household of her husband and takes a new birth. It is a combination of bone to bone and flesh to flesh. To a Hindu wife her husband is her God and her life becomes one of the selfless service and profound dedication to her husband. She not only shares the life and love, but the joys and sorrows, the troubles and tribulation of her husband and becomes an integral part of her husband’s life and activities. Colebrooke in his book “Digest of Hindu Law Volume II” described the status of the wife thus:- “ A wife is considered as half the body of her husband, equally sharing the fruit of pure and impure acts:- whether she ascend the pile after him or survive for the benefit of her husband, she is a faithful wife.”

  11. Further Colebrooke in his book Digest of Hindu Law Volume-II quoted the Mahabharata at page 121 thus:- “ Where females are honoured, there the deities are pleased; but where they are unhonoured there all religious acts become fruitless.” This clearly illustrates the high position which is bestowed on Hindu women by the Shastric law.

  12. From the study of Hindu Law and different religious books, it cannot be disputed that after marriage law enjoins the corresponding duty on the husband to look after her comforts and not only to provide her food and clothes but to protect her from all calamities and to take care of her health and safety.

  13. In the peculiar facts of the present case if we consider the instant settlement, which is nothing but a contract to dissolve the marriage, the Court has to satisfy itself that the contract is legal and valid in the eye of law. From perusal of the facts of the case and the development which has taken place in the present case, it seems that the petitioner-wife agreed for divorce by mutual consent on the condition that the respondent-husband will pay her Rs.12,50,000/- as full and final settlement. The petitioner-wife is suffering from such a disease which has compelled her to agree for the mutual consent divorce. The fact that petitioner-wife is ready for the mutual consent divorce after knowing about her medical condition raises a suspicion in our mind as to whether the consent obtained from the petitioner-wife is free as required by law for granting the decree of divorce by mutual consent.

  14. Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act makes a provision of divorce by mutual consent, which reads as under :- “ 13B Divorce by mutual consent : (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnised before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976), on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved. (2) On the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the date of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub-section (1) and not later than eighteen months after the said date, if the petition is not withdrawn in the meantime, the court shall, on being satisfied, after hearing the parties and after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that a marriage has been solemnised and that the averments in the petition are true, pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree.”

  15. Section 23 casts a duty upon a Court to record its satisfaction before passing a decree in a suit or proceeding. Section 23(1)(bb) is also worth to be quoted hereinbelow:- “ 23.Decree in proceedings : (1) In any proceeding under this Act, whether defended or not, if the court is satisfied that — (a)…………………………………………… (b)…………………………………………… (bb) when a divorce is sought on the ground of mutual consent, such consent has not been obtained by force, fraud or undue influence.

  16. This Court elaborately discussed the aforesaid provisions in the case of Sureshta Devi vs. Om Prakash, (1991) 2 SCC 25, and observed thus:- “…… What is significant in this provision is that there should also be mutual consent when they move the court with a request to pass a decree of divorce. Secondly, the court shall be satisfied about the bona fides and the consent of the parties. If there is no mutual consent at the time of the enquiry, the court gets no jurisdiction to make a decree for divorce. If the view is otherwise, the court could make an enquiry and pass a divorce decree even at the instance of one of the parties and against the consent of the other. Such a decree cannot be regarded as decree by mutual consent.”

  17. If we consider the provisions of Indian Contract Act, it provides that consent is said to be free when it is not caused by “undue influence” as defined in Section 16 of the Act. The contract is said to be induced by “undue influence” where the relations subsisting between the parties are such that one of the parties is in a position to dominate the will of the other and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage over the other.

  18. One more doctrine is to be taken into consideration i.e. “Pre-existing duty doctrine”. It is a principle under the Contract Act that states that if a party to a contract is under a pre-existing duty to perform, then no consideration is given for any modification of the contract and the modification is therefore voidable. In the 13 th edition of the Pollock & Mulla Indian contract and Specific relief Act in Vol.1, it is mentioned at page 101 about the Pre-existing obligation under law which provides that:-“The performance of what one is already bound to do, either by general law or by a specific obligation to the other party, is not a good consideration for a promise; because such performance is no legal burden to the promise, but rather relives him of a duty. Neither is the promise of such performance a consideration, since it adds nothing to the obligation already existing.”

  19. We can apply this principle in the present case. As discussed above, it is a duty of the respondent-husband to take care of the health and safety of the petitioner-wife. In the instant case also it is a primary duty of the husband only to provide facilities for the treatment of the petitioner. This is a pre-existing duty of the husband, provided the husband has sufficient means and he is diligently doing his part in taking care of her. In the present case, by the settlement agreement the respondent-husband is promising to do something which he is already duty bound, is not a valid consideration for the settlement. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; https://twitter.com/ATMwithDick

  20. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we, therefore, pass the following order:-

(i) The transfer petition for the transfer of matrimonial suit being petition No.A-642 of 2015 pending before the Family Court at Bombay, Maharashtra to Family Court at Hyderabad is allowed. The petition is ordered to be transferred accordingly. The transferor court shall forthwith transmit the record of the aforesaid case to the transferee court.

(ii) The respondent-husband shall pay a sum of Rs.Five Lacs (Rs.5,00,000/-) out of Rs.12,50,000/- to the petitioner-wife immediately within a week for her treatment and meeting other medical expenses.

(iii) After the petitioner is fully cured from the disease or within six months whichever is earlier, the Family Court at Hyderabad, where the divorce petition is ordered to be transferred, shall take up the case along with a fresh application that may be filed by the parties under Section 13B for divorce by mutual consent. After compliance of all the formalities, the Family Court at Hyderabad shall dispose of those petitions in accordance with law after recording its satisfaction and giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

…………………… J. (M.Y. Eqbal)

…………………….J. (C. Nagappan)

New Delhi

December 02, 2015

=============================disclaimer==================================
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
===============================================================================
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting
===============================================================================

 

The “Alimony slave”. New slavery in 21st century India !!

The #MoneyTrail and “Alimony slave”

History has seen men being enslaved at different times for different reasons. There were cotton picking slaves, plantation slaves, stone breaking slave labour and so on and so forth. While most such “old” forms of hard labour and slavery have gotten mechanized, or in some cases abolished, a new form of slavery, of men being “enslaved” just to meet their monthly “maintenance”, “spousal support” or “alimony” is on the rise. I am not sure IF the term “alimony slave” already exists. If it doesn’t it’s time to coin the term “#AlimonySlave”. There are numerous cases in India, where wives are granted #alimony even when wives have been proven to be guilty of cruelty and / or neglect ! In most cases in India, interim / ad-interim maintenance is levied on men much before the evidence and trial have even begun !! That means the man is FORCED TO PAY for just the sin of being married or being associated and no other fault. Men are forced to pay even if the woman is at fault ! Since such maintenance can run into 10s of 1000s per month (in one recent case we blogged a 100 thousand monthly maintenance !!), and alimony can be in #millions of rupees, men are forced to slog their b@11s off to keep paying the woman. Add this to the delay in lethargy in courts, the fear of arrest if money not paid, the men are turned into real slaves. With SIF and other sister organisations fighting against #fakeArrests #fake498a etc., #fakeArrest is on the wane. Its also becomming politically incorrect to arrest a man on false charges. So, the anti male industry had set its sights on man’s #efforts and #money !! the Honest, sincere hard working male is becoming a #slave !! The parasites are literally feeding on the man’s blood and sweat😦

While there are 1000s of such cases, we give a few examples here due to paucity of time and resource

How a Child Prodigy lost entire youth fighting cases JUST bcaz of marriage! Madras HC Irretrievable b/down & Cruelty

did the family court REALLY pass an 1 crore alimony decree even though wife was cruel ?

I CAN’T live with a low paid Inspector says wife & still gets 10K p.m. moolah !!! P&H HC

Many cases of crores and crores alimony are comming to light like the one below

Wife gets 2 crores exparte order on US NRI & tries to attach, sell his house ! He runs to HC for setaside