Supreme Court's recent ruling that "Illicit relation by husband was not cruelty" has to be read in facts of this case:
1) Husband had a childhood love affair.
2) Even after seven years and having two children with present wife, he could not forget his childhood lover.
3) The couple could not reconcile to love triangle. So husband gave divorce to wife.
4) Wife could not tolerate pain of being divorced. She committed suicide after divorce.
5) On complaint of deceased wife's mother, seven family members of husband were arrested under 498A, 306.. They were, husband, his aged father, his aged mother, his elder brother, his elder brother's wife, his minor son, and his childhood lover.
6) Minor was sent to juvenile court. Trial court acquitted Elder Brother and his wife. Rest were convicted.
This included conviction of childhood lover also.
7) High Court dismissed appeals of all.
8) SC granted them bail. After bail were granted all the four (poor belonging to wandering labourer tribe ) left their home and disappeared because of fear that SC to may convict them. I lost their contact since then.
9) SC heard appeal about one years ago and reserved judgement.
It pondered for about one year as its ruling on whether illicit relationship and divorce act in this case amounted to cruelty, was likely to affact cultural values and large number of people.
10) After pondering at length for two years, finally SC acquitted all and said, "Illicit relationship itself is not cruelty unless some further cruelty is proved."
11) Salute the judges of Supreme Court. Justice S.J.Mukhopadhyay and Justice Dipak Misra
Haresh Raichura
21/2/15
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
February 21, 2015
February 20, 2015
One method by which I actually solved a relative's marital dispute problem is this: on a stamp paper of Rs. 100/- ..
One method by which I actually solved a relative's marital dispute problem is this:
1) on a stamp paper of Rs. 100/- a Memorandum of Understanding between husband and wife was prepared.
2) This memorandum listed what wife should not do and what husband should not do.
It also which in laws of wife should not interfere with their family life.
It also listed which in laws of husband side should not interfere in their family life.
3) Both wrote their wishes.
4) It was then signed by them and witnessed by their parents and it was also registered at at office of public registrar...
5) Though such document may have little value in court, it has great psychological effect on minds of parties.
The relatives who tried this methods are now happily living with their son in South India
Haresh Raichura
20/2/15
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
1) on a stamp paper of Rs. 100/- a Memorandum of Understanding between husband and wife was prepared.
2) This memorandum listed what wife should not do and what husband should not do.
It also which in laws of wife should not interfere with their family life.
It also listed which in laws of husband side should not interfere in their family life.
3) Both wrote their wishes.
4) It was then signed by them and witnessed by their parents and it was also registered at at office of public registrar...
5) Though such document may have little value in court, it has great psychological effect on minds of parties.
The relatives who tried this methods are now happily living with their son in South India
Haresh Raichura
20/2/15
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
February 17, 2015
Reasons why it appears fruitless to challenge an unconstitutional provision in HC ...
In India, there are many many unconstitutional provisions of law on statue books, in rules, in regulations. They are either too vague or they are directly against Constitution or Law declared by Supreme Court in other judgements.
1) Normal rule is that such provision need to be challenged first in High Court, even if there is no bar to challenge such provisions directly in Supreme Court.
2) But for many reasons, there is a perceptions among lawyers that no fruitful results come if such rules are challenged first in High Court.
Some Reasons
A ) If it is a central law, such petition may surf in many High Courts.
Then Central govt may file a petition in Supreme Court, saying that all such cases be transferred to SC or to some specific High Court, to avoid inconsistent judgements.
This is a logically fallacious ground.
But in past, I have seen it working many a times.
If the cases gets transferred, the lawyers who have filed such petitions in HC, suffer demotivation.
B) If unconstitutional provision is a State made law, then it may probably involve a direct confrontation between High Court and Legal Department of Government.
If the Chief Justice is under consideration for being elevation to Supreme Court, he may or may not like to decide such a case.
Because when Government is one of the factor which has say in appointment of judges as per proposed law or by way of giving feed back to Collegium through Law Ministry, such perceptions may sometimes arise.
...
There are also other C, D, E etc reasons.
But I think this is a small place to write them all.
Haresh Raichura
17/2/15
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
1) Normal rule is that such provision need to be challenged first in High Court, even if there is no bar to challenge such provisions directly in Supreme Court.
2) But for many reasons, there is a perceptions among lawyers that no fruitful results come if such rules are challenged first in High Court.
Some Reasons
A ) If it is a central law, such petition may surf in many High Courts.
Then Central govt may file a petition in Supreme Court, saying that all such cases be transferred to SC or to some specific High Court, to avoid inconsistent judgements.
This is a logically fallacious ground.
But in past, I have seen it working many a times.
If the cases gets transferred, the lawyers who have filed such petitions in HC, suffer demotivation.
B) If unconstitutional provision is a State made law, then it may probably involve a direct confrontation between High Court and Legal Department of Government.
If the Chief Justice is under consideration for being elevation to Supreme Court, he may or may not like to decide such a case.
Because when Government is one of the factor which has say in appointment of judges as per proposed law or by way of giving feed back to Collegium through Law Ministry, such perceptions may sometimes arise.
...
There are also other C, D, E etc reasons.
But I think this is a small place to write them all.
Haresh Raichura
17/2/15
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
Biggest knowledge banks in Supreme Court are two : 1) Know numbers of ....
Biggest knowledge banks in Supreme Court are two : 1) Know numbers of similar pending cases 2) Know similar judgements of judge.
There are plethora of judgements of Supreme Courts. You cannot read all. You cannot know all.
You can get best results in Supreme Court
1) if you know who are the judges before whom you are arguing a point.
2) if you know what are the judgements earlier given by these judges regarding argument you want to make,
I think you are well equipped.
Haresh Raichura
17/2/14
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
There are plethora of judgements of Supreme Courts. You cannot read all. You cannot know all.
You can get best results in Supreme Court
1) if you know who are the judges before whom you are arguing a point.
2) if you know what are the judgements earlier given by these judges regarding argument you want to make,
I think you are well equipped.
Haresh Raichura
17/2/14
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
February 13, 2015
#Knowhow: Even Magistrate can grant stay on basis of telephone.. Procedures do not restrict powers of Judges: Expl..
Sometimes people are surprised when they hear that a judge has granted stay order on basis of a phone call...
But every judge has powers to pass such order.
Normally they follow procedures prescribed by law. They do everything in open court. Their all orders are available to parties or public.
To be impartial, is the only thing required from a Judge.
In extra ordinary situation, any judge can pass order on oral submissions,( this includes telephone calls)..
Normally, judges do not exercise such extra ordinary powers.
But the point is they do have powers. It has been there since many many years.
Haresh Raichura
13/2/15
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
But every judge has powers to pass such order.
Normally they follow procedures prescribed by law. They do everything in open court. Their all orders are available to parties or public.
To be impartial, is the only thing required from a Judge.
In extra ordinary situation, any judge can pass order on oral submissions,( this includes telephone calls)..
Normally, judges do not exercise such extra ordinary powers.
But the point is they do have powers. It has been there since many many years.
Haresh Raichura
13/2/15
Copyright : Haresh Raichura 2014. All Rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)