Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“Instead of tendering an unqualified apology, has tried to contest his act of solemnizing the second marriage during the pendency of the above appeal and stay having been granted therein.”
“Here is a case where a brave and loving girl wants to marry the son of the petitioner, who is undergoing life imprisonment at High Security Prison, Viyyur.”
The Court noted that the authorities appointed under the SOPs were either ignorant about it or lax in following the time frames and guidelines in strict letter and spirit.
“The parties are dark complexioned people, but their child was fair complexioned. That is the reason why the dispute arose, and the husband started to physically harass the wife and drove her out of the matrimonial house along with the child.”
The Court noted that the complainant (‘victim’) and her mother, were currently exploring matrimonial prospects, and that the pendency of a criminal case might result as a serious impediment to her future opportunities and personal relationships.
“The gold given to a bride at the time of marriage is often kept by the husband or his family under the guise of safekeeping of family customs. The woman rarely gets a written record or receipt for such transfers and the woman’s access to her own ornaments can be restricted”.
Kerala High Court said that the marriage under the customary or personal law, which is otherwise valid, has to be treated as valid between parties to that marriage for all practical purposes, unless and until it is challenged by any of the parties to that marriage, and declared void on any valid grounds.
“Petitioner is a person with family ties and is not a flight risk. Nature of prosecution evidence is mostly all documentary in nature, which has been seized and there is no likelihood of tempering with the same.”
The Court declared the marriage as null and void on the grounds of mental and physical cruelty as the wife, being a minor, was not ready to perform the marital obligations
The circular dated 30-01-2024 issued by the State of Goa, does much more than just informing the public of the provision of Section 52(1)(za) of the Copyright Act, 1957 and interfered with the enforcement mechanism provided in the Act for exercise or enforcing rights of copyright societies under the Act.
In the instant case, the Court had to consider whether maintenance proceedings under S. 488 of CrPC before Trial Court can be quashed on the ground of husband’s pleading that he had already divorced his wife.
A fascicular reading of Sections 125(1) and 125(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 clearly demonstrates that if husband wilfully and intentionally neglects to provide maintenance to his wife then she can approach before the court seeking maintenance.
“It is not the case of petitioners that in case if marriage is not performed, then they are still interested to live in live-in relationship. It is also not the case of petitioners that petitioner No.1 would accept Muslim religion.”
“It is very easy for the married man to walk out of the live in relationship and in such case the court cannot shut their eyes to the vulnerable condition of the survivor of such distressful live in relationship and children born out of such relationship.”
DCDRC observed that the video was not just a collection of images and sounds but a vessel for the heartbeats of a family’s collective journey, carrying the laughter, tears, and love of a day that marked the beginning of a new chapter in their lives.
The High Court opined that taking care of children is shrouded by countless responsibilities and necessary expenditure from time to time and the husband cannot preposterously contend that the wife is lazing around and not earning money to take care of the children.
The Calcutta High Court stated that the documents presented by the petitioner which mention her as wife are mere declarations, subject to proof, if challenged.
Kerala High Court explained that “Cruelty consists of acts which are dangerous to life, limb or health. Cruelty may be physical or mental.”
Sexual violence against a woman should invite no tolerance, however, manipulating the system by the parties to a case under Section 376 IPC would equally need to be dealt with a stern hand and serious efforts should be made to address and remedy failings within the criminal justice system and through our society.
The High Court found that a father’s anxiety to meet his daughter was dubbed as criminal trespass and intimidation, however, these offences were loosely laid against the father.