Sc on retrospective effect
No retrospective effect of laws
Summary: In our opinion,. the protection given by Article 20(1) is a complete answer to the appellant’s contention. It follows that the view taken by the High Court that the respondents cannot be tried and punished for the offence provided in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code which is a new offence created subsequent ‘to the commission of the offence attributed to the respondents does not suffer from any infirmity.
How to use these judgments: Use these judgments to quash or for dismissal of DV case, if the complaint under DV Act contains all acts of domestic violence prior to the date 26.10.2006 without anyone of them after this date. Suppose, your wife is living away from you or matrimonial home before this date, also you have no contact with her since then and she filed DV for the acts of Domestic violence before this date you can use this judgment asiIt is a fundamental principle of law that any penal provision has no retrospective operation but only prospective means if a law was not in operation or enacted at the time of occurrence of an offence, the accused cannot be proceeded against under that law.
Full Judgment:
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PETITIONER: SONI DEVRAJBHAI BABUBHAI
Vs.
RESPONDENT: STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT28/08/1991
BENCH:
VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J)
BENCH:
VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J)
SHARMA, L.M. (J)
CITATION:
1991 AIR 2173 1991 SCR (3) 812; 1991 SCC (4) 298 JT 1991 (3) 542 1991 SCALE(2)410
ACT:
Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 304-B (As inserted by Act 43 of 1986)–Scope
and object of–Dowry death-Death occuring prior to insertion of Section 304-B
Section 304-B held prospective and consequently inapplicable–It contains a
substantive provision creating a new offence and, does not merely effect a
procedural change for trial of pre-existing substantive offence.
Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 113-B. Presumption as to dowry death–
Section 113-B contains rule of evidence to prove the offence of dowry death.
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961: Purpose of. Constitution of India, 1950: Article
20(1) Protection against conviction for a new offence created subsequent to the
commission of offence.
HEADNOTE:
Appellant’s daughter was married to respondent No. 2 on 15.12.1984. She died
on 13.8.1986. The appellant filed a criminal complaint against ther espondents viz. daughter’s husband and his relatives for an offence under section 498-A, triable by a Magistrate of First Class, ‘read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 alleging that his daughter’s death was unnatural resulting from torture by her husband and his relatives. By Act No. 43 of 1986,the Indian Penal Code was amended and Section 304-B, offence of dowry death, was inserted in the Code w.e.f. 19.11.1986. Since the newly inserted offence of dowry death was triable. by a Court of Session, the appellant flied an application before the Magistrate for committing the case to the Court of Session for trial of offence under section 304-B. ‘The Magistrate dismissed his application by holding that the amendment being prospective was inapplicable’ to the case because the death had occurred prior to the amendment. Thereafter the appellant filed an application in the High Court for a direction to Commit the case of dowry death to the Court of Session. The High Court also dismissed his application by holding that since the offence was committed prior to the date of insertion of section 304-B, the section was not applicable to the case. In appeal to this Court on the question whether section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code was applicable to a case of dowry death where the death has occurred prior to the insertion of Section 304-B, it was contended on behalf of the appellant that section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code does not create a new offence and contains merely a rule of evidence. Dismissing the appeal, this Court.
HELD:
1. The offence of dowry death punishable under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code is a new offence inserted in the code with effect from.19.11.1986 when Act No. 43 of 1986 came into force The said offence is punishable with a minimum sentence of seven years which may extend to life imprisonment and is triable by Court of Session. The corresponding amendments made by Act No.43 of 1986 in the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act relate to the trial and proof of the offence. Section 498-A inserted in the Indian Penal Code by the Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 is an offence triable by a Magistrate of the First Class and is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years in addition to fine. The offence of dowry death punishable under section 304-B provides for a more stringent offence than section 498-A. Section 304-is a substantive provision creating a new offence and not merely a provision effecting a change in procedure for trial of a pre-existing substanative offence.
The rule of evidence to prove the offence of dowry death is contained in section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act providing for presumption as to dowry death which was a simultaneous amendment made in the Indian Evidence Act for proving ‘the offence of dowry death. The fact that the Indian Evidence Act was so amended simultaneously with the insertion of section 304-B in the Indian Penal code by the same Amendment Act is another pointer in this direction. There fore, it cannot be held that section304-B. does not create a new offence and contains merely a rule of evidence.[818D-F, 819C-D]
2. The respondents are being tried in the Court of Magistrate of .the First
Class for the offence punishable under section 498-A which was in the statute
book on the date of death of Appellant’s daughter Their trial and punishment for
the offence of dowry death provided in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code
‘with the minimum sentence of seven years’ imprisonment for an act done by them
prior to creation of the new offence of dowry death would clearly deny to them
the protection afforded by clause (1) of Article 20 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the view taken by the High Court that the respondents cannot be tried and punished for the offence provided in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code which is a new offence created subsequent to the commission of the offence attributed to the respondents does not suffer from any infirmity. [818E, G,819E]
JUDGMENT:
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION:
Criminal Appeal No. 533of 1991.
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.1. 1989 of the Gujarat High Court in
Miscellaneous Criminal Application No. 32 of 1989.
H.S. Zaveri for the Appellant.
Dushayant Dave, Ashish Verma and Anip Sachthey. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VERMA, J. Petitioner’s daughter Chhaya Was married to Respondent No. 2 Satish on5. 12. 1984 and they started living together in their marital home at Bagasara. On 13.8. 1986, Chhaya died atBagasara. The petitioner and his wife got some vague information about their daughter Chhaya and went to Bagasara, the same day but were unable to meet or see their daughter who had died. The petitioner suspected that their daughter’s death was unnatural resulting from torture by her husband and his relatives. The petitioner filed a criminal complaint against Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, who are the husband, his parents and sister which was trans- ferred to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class at Dhari and registered as Criminal Case No. 382 of 1988 for an offence under section 498-A read with section 34 I.P.C. The petitioner filed an application for committing the case to the Court of Session for trial for .an offence punishable under section 304-B I.P.C. which was inserted in the Indian Penal Code by Act No. 43 of 1986 w.e.f. 19.11.1986. On29.11.1988, the Learned Magistrate dismissed the petitioner’s application holding that this amendment being prospective was inapplicable to a death which occurred on 13.8.1986, prior to the amendment. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner moved an application (Misc. Criminal Application No. 32 of 1989) in the High Court of Gujarat .for a direction to commit this case of dowry death to ‘the Court of Session since an ‘offence punish-able under section 304-B is triable by the Court of Session.’ By the impugned order dated January 10, 1989, the High Court has dismissed that application. Hence this special leave petition. 815 Leave is granted.
The point arising for our decision is the applicability of section 304-B of
the Indian Penal Code to the present case where the death alleged to be a dowry death occurred prior to insertion of section 304-B in the Indian Penal Code. This is the only ground on which the. appellant claims trial of the case in the Court of Session. The reason given by the High Court to support its view is that the offence was committed prior to the date of insertion of section 304-B in the Indian Penal Code on account of which the section can have no application to the present case. None of the courts below. has examined the applicability of any other pre-existing more stringent provision even if section 304-B does not
apply. As such affirmation of the view that section 304-B does not apply, will
not preclude the appellant from contending that any other more stringent
provision is attracted on the accusation made. If that point is raised, the
courts below will have to decide the same on merits on the basis of accusation
made. It is in this background that the point raised by the appellant regarding
applicability of section 304-B is decided by us.
Section 304-B and the cognate provisions are meant for eradication of the
social evil of dowry which has been the bane of Indian society ‘and continues
unabated in spite of emanicipation of women and the women’s liberation movement.This all prevading malady in our society has only a few lucky exception in spite of equal treatment and opportunity to boys and girls for education and career. Society continues to perpetuate the difference between them for the pur- pose of marriage and it is this distinction which makes the dowry system thrive. Even though for eradication of this social evil, effective steps can be taken by the society itself and the social sanctions of the community can be more deterrent, yet legal sanctions in the form of its .prohibition and punishment are some steps in that direction. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was enacted for this purpsoe. The Report of the Joint Committee of Parliament quoted the observations of Jawaharlal Nehru to indicate the role of legislation in dealing with the social evil as under:
” Legislation .cannot by itself normally solve deep-rooted social problems, One has to approach them in other ways too, but legislation is necessary and essential, so that it may give that push and have that educative factor as well as the legal sanctions behind it which help public opinion to be given a certain shape.”
The enactment of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 in its original form was found
inadequate. Experience shows that the demand of dowry and the mode of its
recovery takes different forms to achieve the same result and various indirect
and sophisticated methods are being used to ‘avoid leaving any evidence of the
offence. Similarly, the consequences of non-fulfilment of the demand of dowry
meted out to the unfortunate bride takes different forms to avoid any apparent
causal connection between the demand of dowry and its prejudicial effect on the bride. This experience has led to several other legislative measures in the continuing battle to combat this evil. The Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, 1983 (No. 45 of 1983) was an act further to amend the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 498-A was inserted in the Indian Penal Code and corresponding amendments were made in the Code of Criminal Procedure which included section 198A .therein and also inserted section 113A in the Indian Evidence Act,. 1872. Thereafter, the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986 (No. 43 of 1986) was enacted further to amend the Dowry Prohibition .Act, 1961 and to make certain .necessary changes in the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Two of the salient features of the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986 (No. 43 of 1986) stated in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill are as under:
“(e)Offences under the Act are proposed to be made non-bailable.
“(g) A new offence of “dowry death” is proposed to be included in the Indian Penal Code and the necessary consequential amendments in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 have also been proposed.”
Accordingly by section 7 of the Amendment Act, section 8 of the Dowry’
Prohibition’ Act, 1961 was amended to make every Offence under this Act non-
bailable while continuing it to be non-compoundable. By sections 10, 11 and 12,
amendments were made in the Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 and the Indian’ Evidence Act, 1872, as part of the same scheme as follows:
“10. In the Indian Penal Code, after, section 304-A, the following section shall be inserted, namely:
‘304-B. Dowry death. (1) Where the death of a woman is caused by any burns or bodily injury or occurs otherwise then under normal circumstances within seven years of her marriage and it is shown that .soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment by her husband or any relative of her husband for, Or in connection with, any demand for dowry such death shall be called “dowry death”, and such husband or relative shall be deemed to have caused her death.
Explanation-For the purposes of this sub-section, ,’dowry”. shall have the same meaning as in section 2 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 196 1 (28 of 1961).
(2) Whoever commits dowry death shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for.
“11. In the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in the First Schedule after the entries relating to section304-A, the following entries shall be inserted, namely:
Section Offence Punishment COgnizable Bailable or By what or non- non-bail-Court cognizable able tribal1 2 3 4 5 6 “304-B ‘ Dowry Imprison- Ditto Non- Court of death ment of not bailable ‘Session.” less’ than seven years but which may extend to imprisonment for life. ‘
“12. In the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, after section113-A, the following section shall be inserted, namely:- “11.3-B. Presumption as to dowry death.-When the question is whether a person has committed the dowrydeath of a woman and it is shown that soon before her ‘death. such woman has been subjected by such .person to cruelty Or harassment for, or in connecting with, any demand for dowry, the Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
Explanation.-For the purpose of this section’, “dowry death” shall have the same meaning as in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).”
It is clear from the above historical background that the offence of dowry
death punishable under section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code is a new offence inserted in the Indian Penal Code with effect from 19.11.1986 when Act No. 43 of 1986 came into force. The offence under section 304-B is punishable with a minimum sentence of seven years which may extend to life imprisonment and is triable by Court of Session. The corresponding amendments made in the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act relate to the trial and proof of the offence. Section 498;A inserted in the Indian Penal Code by the Criminal Law (Second Amendment)Act, 1983 (Act No. 46 of 1983) is an offence triable by a Magistrate of the First Class and is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years in addition to fine. It is for the offence punishable under section 498-A which was in the statute book on the date of death of Chhaya that the respondents are being tried in the Court of Magistrate of the First Class. The offence punishable under section 304-B, known as. dowry death, was a new offence created with effect .from 19.11.1986 by insertion of the provision in the Indian Penal Code providing for a more stringent offence’ than section 498-A. Section 304-B is a substantive provision creating a new offence and not merely a provision effecting a, change in procedure for trial of a pre-existing substantive offence. Acceptance of the appellant’s contention would amount to holding that the respondents can be tried and punished for the offence of dowry death provided in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code with the minimum sentence of seven years’ imprisonment for an act done by them prior to creation of the new offence of dowry death. In our opinion, this would clearly deny to them the protection afforded by clause (1) of Article 20 of the Constitution which reads as under:
“20.. Protection in respect of conviction for offences. –(1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of the law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, ‘nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. ‘ ‘
” In our opinion ,. the protection given by Article 20(1) is a complete answer to the appellant’s contention. The contention ‘of learned counsel ‘for the appellant that section 304-B inserted in the Indian Penal Code does not create a new offence and’ contains merely a rule of evidence is untenable. The rule of evidence to prove the offence of dowry death is contained in section113-B of the Indian Evidence Act providing for presumption as to dowry death which was a simultaneous’ amendment made in the Indian Evidence Act for proving the offence of dowry death. The fact that the Indian Evidence Act was so amended simultaneously with the insertion of section 304-B in the Indian Penal’ Code by the same Amendment Act is’ another pointer in his direction. This contention is, therefore, rejected. It follows that the view taken by the High Court that the respondents cannot be tried and punished for the offence provided in section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code which is a new offence created subsequent ‘to the commission of the offence attributed to the respondents does not suffer from any infirmity.
However, as earlier indicated, in case the accusation against the respondents discloses commission of any other more stringent pre-existing offence by the respondents than section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant would be entitled to raise that question and the Court will then consider and decide it on that basis. No such argument having been advanced before us or any of the courts below so far, the same does not arise for consideration in the present proceeding.
With these observations, the appeal is dismissed.
T.N.A. Appeal dismissed.
IIT-B, IIM-B, 498-A 
sujay said
will this retrospective clause hold if the wife who left matrimonial home before oct 2006 and had been staying in her parents house with no contact with huby or his family in anyway, suddenly turns at the business establishment of huby in march 2008, tries to abuse and provoke the huby who remains calm and composed and make her go away. But after one month in may 2009 she goes and files dv case makeing concocted and false allegations of abuse and other typical stero type allegation, giving incidences from period of before oct 2006, includes her allegations covering the last visit to huby at workplace in march 2009.
Does this incident at workplace outside the shared household, ie in march 2009 come under domestic violence
basically what i wish to know is- will the visit to and arguements b/w the couple in march 2009 bring the cause of action to march 2009 and wipe and do away the gap of 2 years thereby resetting
pls guide
regards
iluvshrutiverma said
Unfortunately this one incident does wipe out the gap of 2 years. In fact, that might have been the whole purpose of her coming to your workplace.
Domestic violence is defined as violence between people who are involved in a domestic relationship – it does not mandate that the violence has to happen in the shared household.
Usually, the DV case will revolve around monetary relief, protection order, residence order.
There are judgments (i think 3 of them) on this blog that say daughter in law can not claim residence rights in your parent’s house.
One of my friends used ‘Shelter home’ concept very smartly – he produced the list of shelter homes in that city and suggested that his wife be provided accommodation in one of those shelter homes (provided by the state govt), and he was willing to pay the cost.
sujay said
thanks for the reply.
Thanks for the shelter home point. taken and understood 100% what u wish to convey
But i am staying in a rented accomodation with my parents and brother’s family which is matrimonial home to her. She herself is qualified and working. she is not willing to come to us but wants does not want my parents to stay there.
Is there any judgement for PWDVA case where monetary relief is denied coz she is working and earning (i have all proofs in place with witnessess).
She wants me to break all ties with my ailing parents and bro and be a domesticated huby to her parents or stay in a separate home. Can the court force me to take a separate home and live separately with a B***ch just to drag a non existent marriage.?
She had thought that her leaving and creating scenes will make me do what she fancies. But i mentally trained myself and family out of all mess wanted to create.
I am in no hurry to settle this case ( and many more that will be in pipeline 498a 125 crpc hma 13 ) and wud like to make her loose her charm and beauty in combatting court room with all counters etc, where she has dragged me and i am enjoying it.
i am determined to not give into her whims and fancies .
i know 498a cud be next
iluvshrutiverma said
no court can force u to leave your family (parents and brother).
and realize one thing – families are not made in courts. families can only be broken in courts. and that is what indian masses need to understand. no court can make you and your wife live like a husband and wife. full stop.
what the court/ pwdva can do is make u pay for the accommodation where she is staying – the court can ask u to pay her maintenance – the court can ask u to take her back into the matrimonial home (residence order) – the court can ask u to rent an accommodation for her (this will not happen directly, but if there is RCR sec 9 of hindu marriage act, then in some of the strategies u might have to rent a cheap place just to declare as ur matrimonial home, and even then u can not be forced to live there). so all in all – courts can only make u pay for her.
its difficult to say whether there would be any monetary relief or not since i do not know the exact earnings (hers and yours).
good luck
sujay said
i dont want to give her my shit also forget abt a penny.
she is well qualified medico and having private practice with income of ~15k pm but not filling itr.
my income is also same and equally qualified engnr filing itr of 2lac.
got ur point on rented accomodation but neither courts nor she can force me to live beyond my means.
The best thing is, she thinks that she is a daughter of a sophistcated high moving father ( my FIL) and cannot live in a downmarket area so while considering rented place, wont the court consider my standings or does it abide by the wife’s whims.
Today she has offered me to come to a place anywhere of my choice,which will be purchased by her father in my( offered me to pay a part of stamp duty and cost but it is meagre only name sake) and her name and they withdraw the case. Isnt this dowry offering.What to do ? what shud be done to rope them in DP3 at a future time required.i have taken sum time to think
(PS-My some friends say to take it and parasitize on FIL and make them taste their own pill.)
iluvshrutiverma said
I see people all around me cursing courts and the system. But in most cases, people who are weak give in to extortion. Courts are pro-women, but no court judge can physically make you sign a cheque in the name of wife. I am not saying one should disrespect the law or the court.
I respect them, but ensure that you have utilized all the provisions that are there in the law to delay the court decision OR to influence the court decision in your favor.
One other related factor is that men are cowards. Historically they have gone to war fronts and died for an intangible entity called ‘nation’ but they have never fought their own domestic battles as fiercely as their spouses. Hence, end result – lawyers today do not know how to fight from the side of the husband.
Coming to your particular case –
1. You might end up paying her a small amount of money if you can not prove her employment.
2. about her ITR, she is exempt from paying income tax if her income is less than 180,000
3. Actually sometimes courts do force men to live beyond their means. Read here http://wp.me/plC3a-47 . Therefore it is important that we keep fighting to change the biased views against men.
4. She might be the duaghter of Ambani for all the courts care. The living standards of the parties when they were staying together will be considered as the ‘normal’ living standards.
5. If you want to sue them for dowry, then you do not have to go into the apartment registration etc. You can very well do so with the help of marriage photographs where gifts are exchanged. And also (if she has not already done so), she would herself say that they gave dowry in her own petitions.
Good luck
sujay said
Dear bro,
thanks for the reply.
pls address the last option i mentioned above as
“Today she has offered me to come to a place anywhere of my choice,which will be purchased by her father in my( offered me to pay a part of stamp duty and cost but it is meagre only name sake) and her name and they withdraw the case. Isnt this dowry offering.What to do ?
i have taken sum time to think
PS-My some friends say to take it and parasitize on FIL and make them taste their own pill.”
10x
iluvshrutiverma said
i replied, i said “5. If you want to sue them for dowry, then you do not have to go into the apartment registration etc. You can very well do so with the help of marriage photographs where gifts are exchanged. And also (if she has not already done so), she would herself say that they gave dowry in her own petitions.”
in addition, if its just a meagre sum then do not fall in this trap, she would take away the house also. that must be the trick. pay some 10% share and get the house registered jointly so she owns 50% of it
sujay said
thanks for the reply.
They are putting this offer as an attempt to save the marriage ( in responce to my hardened stand that i will fight it over )they have offered that i pay one lac of the total cost of house which is 45 lac (rest 44 lac will be from joint a/c of my FIL and wife which i had no knowledge till date )and the registration will be 50%-50% in my and her name.?
Their sole purpose is to separate me from my family sumhow.
WHAT TO DO?? the ball is on my side as they are awaiting my reply.
Can this be a trap?
what to do. i am fed up with her bullshit drama as she cannot take the normal household responcibities also which she promises to do. There is NO TRUST NOW.
iluvshrutiverma said
You have yourself answered your questoin – Since there is no trust, the marriage can not be saved.
In the ‘financial scenario’ that you mentioned, even if the house is on joint name, it might still be given to your wife completely. A friend of mine from Jabalpur (M.P.) had purchased a car on his wife’s name. He was paying the EMI’s. The wife deserted him because of differences, and my friend could actually get the car back from the court – because he was paying for it, and the car rightly belonged to it.
Secondly, even if you gain something like 20-22 lacs from this transaction. Are you up for sale? Is this much money worth your life/ peace of mind? Would you really want to risk making your life hell again?
In the last 3-4 years, I have interacted personally with around 400 – 450 harassed husbands, I know of only 1 case where reconciliation was possible after the wife went to the police. Most of the times, wives come back only with oblique motives to wreck vengeance furhter.
sujay said
Thanks for the reply,
you confirmed my thoughts by saying- “wives come back only with oblique motives to wreck vengeance furhter.”
For me it was all over when i got this dv gift and i saw court room.
They cannot lure me into traps.She never cud when she was staying with me.
HENCE PROVED ONCE A NAAGIN ALWAYS A NAAGIN.
Since i’ve decided NOT TO MARRY AGAIN and get into this mess again so let me know
1.Is it possible to let the marriage remain in a suspended state with she living at her parental house and i continue with my life in my home after getting the dv withdrawn/quashed.And what are the drawbacks/negatives in such scenario(besides the financial support which she doesnt demand from me as of now)
2. What if i dont give divorce to her and make her languish at her father’s place(So to say meet like friends once in 3 or 4 months but not cohabit like/as huby-wife)
iluvshrutiverma said
It is not only about your deciding not to marry. The gender politics is much larger in scope. Eg. DV Act applies to any domestic relationship, so u can not even live-in with a girl. False rape accusations would make you scared even of dating. So, it is the whole feminist propaganda that needs to be exposed.
1. Yes, it is very much possible for the marriage to remain in suspended state. My marriage is in that stage since 4 years now.
2. Why do you even have to meet once in 3-4 months?
sujay said
thanks,
meeting once every 3-4 months is what she wants when i declined to move out of my home staying separate from my parents ( i told her when she cant leave her parents being a girl and not socially and legally bound then how cud i leave them for sumone who doesnt respect me or my emotions blah blah and the ususal stuff)and fight it out in the courts.
It appears to me(i may b wrong) that they were not anticipating the way i have reacted to the court notice and giving them out of the box suggestions which they tell me are not social and workable but then what they have done is also not traditionally so called social and workable.
iluvshrutiverma said
i do not know whether women are complex or they just pretend to be complex. what is the logic in meeting 3 times in a year?
nonetheless, yes this ‘separated’ arrangement works perfectly fine.
good luck.
sujay said
neither me know the same abot the feminine complexity so i have also become very complexed !! but not feminined
But what i have learnt is that the more illogical and irrelavant unrelated and non-descript ur answers are to them- the more logical and relavant they talk cos they will just do the opposite of what u tell them. So if u want black,they will u give u white. so tell them that u want white when u actually want black and they will give what u wanted ie. black.:)
thanks
Fighter said
I would say , you should keep away from a Nagin as much as possible. Meeting 3 times a year or month may mean showing there is no desertion.. coming back with the house gift is just a way to get back to you and either succeed to completely domesticate you or plan another attack on you like preparing stage for a false future charges against you of cruelty and all.. It is possible that she is not able to execute her venom onto you in current circumstances and hence wants to show you some bait to lure and execute her strategy..
Why would you want to go back in such a relationship except if you are having a kid with her ? money should not be the motive…
…………….
A Fellow
sujay said
thanks fighter,
Kid is there but he was tactically diverted away from me so that i donot develop any emotional bondings and has been tried to use as pawn to blackmail and force me. They have tried all weapons. So i am playing a game with a long time repercussions.
Rest assured i am aware of all their traps as i analyse their moves with a high power lens.
Though i have declined their quarterly meeting like friends offer. But just for academic purpose does meeting like friends and NOT COHABITING LIKE HUBY WIFE reset the desertion start point for counting the time to file for divorce 13 hma-1-ib.
i think casual meeting,reconcilliatory or otherwise,is NOT EQUAL TO COHABITATION and also meeting for a couple of min-hrs once 4 months is also NOT CONDONATION of CRUELTY OF EITHER SPOUSE.
( PS -“i am NOT saying mating” )
PLS DO CLARIFY. thanks
Fighter said
yes, meetings and living is two separate things and meetings esp. for the purpose of discussions can be done anytime. However be careful that she can cause DV incidents during these meetings and it can harm you atleast on the face value of it. But I see as such no big harm in agreeing to meet, just keep the proof that call for the meeting was done by her/them.
I sympathize with you for the kid part esp. Don’t know how these kids gonna be brought up by a selfish mother. More than a mother, one should qualify first as a normal human being to bring up the child. But Seems no one listens.. courts just seems to prefers status quo and prefers mother as initial years natural guardian. In the end, it seems whoever has the physical child custody, court seldom changes that and if at all, that too after lots of fighting time. May be if she remarries then you may get his custody.
Just one question from my study point of view, do you think all your trouble started around the time of conception of the child ? atleast mine started with that. I am seeing lots of friends who has the start of the problem associated with a child’s conception (not even delivery).
Regards
FF
sujay said
fighter,
u r right.
For me it started after 4 days of marriage but it took a major expressive turn at 4th month of pregnancy and most dramatic after FIL retirement.Probably once conception happen this creed of girls thinks that boy is now in their vices from all sides and start executing all shit with more conviction ofcourse initiated ,motivated and supported by her natal side which is at max fault and does most of the violence ( all kinda of as in pwdva but it is huby and his family who pays and bears the legal hammer.
what is ur conclusion of the study?
thanks
arun gulati said
Dear Sir,
Your site is wonderful, but how does 1 contact u?
sir, i want to download the judgements from ARI, as they give a small para in Bold, which is the synopsis of the entire case with (-) hyphens.
can u pl recommend me a site/pay site for this. This way i can give them to my lawyer for fighting my 11 cases.
brgds
arun
iluvshrutiverma said
Dear Shri Arun ji,
The best way to contact me is to leave a message on any of my blogs.
If you want to meet me, then meet any of the fighting victims and we all have relatively similar views. (Personally, I attend weekly meetings in Delhi and Chennai very often).
I do not know what is ARI but if you meant All India Report, then its AIR.
Amongst free judgments sites, my favourite is http://www.indiankanoon.org/.
Amongst paysites, I like http://www.manupatra.com/
By the way – with 11 cases, your wife is coming quite close to what my wife did. And I am glad that she did. It was only after she ruined my life that I felt challenged enough to do something in my life. Earlier, I was just a happy – go – lucky guy without any aspirations. I do not know how to express in words but I was so ‘bored’ in life. I had a very easy life in terms of education and career, I managed to get easily what I wanted so I was bored. It is my marriage with Shruti and the following episodes that made my life interesting 🙂
arun gulati said
Dear Sir,
Thankyou for taking out time and giving me this information. I am grateful. I sure admire your spirits. Somehow, at age 55 it is not a pleasant scenario to go between Drs and courts. Anyway at this juncture of life what is there to gain out of any dispute? Life’s misunderstandings, values, needs and requirements are changing at a rapid rate. My approach is that of a defensive opponent and so far things have gone in my favour. She is realizing the futility of our Judicial system and i still hope that good sense prevails on her and that for the sake of our only son, 21yrs, we can be together again – not on any terms but as good humans and as husband and wife. If it happens, the lessons learnt, the agonies and frustrations what each 1 has gone thru and learnt the hard way, may help us in life’s journey which is predefined as death. Thanks.
iluvshrutiverma said
Dear Shri Arun ji,
With due respect to your experiences, let me tell you what I gained out of this dispute – I gained a lot of self respect. Have you seen the movie ‘Rang De Basanti’? Do you remember a dialogue where Aamir Khan says “Hamein pata hi nahin tha ki koi aisa jazba bhi hai jis ke liye mein maarne ko tayyar ho jaye” (Translation: We never knew that something existed that can trigger me to be so motivated in life).
To tell you the truth – I am at the best time of my life – career wise, health wise, social circle wise. And almost all of it can be attributed to my 498 wife.
Career – if it was not for her, I would not have lost my MNC job and become an entrepreneur.
Health – if it were not these long lasting legal battles, the need to be healthy wasn’t that prominent.
Social cirlce – I know 100s and 100s of harassed husbands like me, and we go a very long way to help each other. Small things – I do not need a hotel to stay in any city of India. In order to get any document from the court, all I have to do is make a phone call to someone whose case is in that city/ court, so I do not have to even go there.
I gained a lot of confidence also – There was a time 4 years back when I had lost almost everything that I had to lose, but I have re-built my life. I can not express the feeling in words, but it is such a beautiful feeling of confidence when I think “No person/ policy/ law/ Govt can take from me what I have inside me. You can take away all superficial things but I have the talent and the fire – I will accomplish everything again quite quickly”.
Talking about you – you are right that no one gains out of disputes, but the initiator should have thought about it before she started. I know people who feel ‘let down’ all their lives once they compromise with their wife’.
About your son, 21 years is mature enough. Compromising for his sake does not make much sense.
Your wife is realizing the futility of our Judicial system – Sure, every wife realizes that once the husband decides to fight back BUT this does not mean she became a human. She is still the devil who made your life hell. It was just that now she realized that courts will not be able to give justice to her.
You are right again that the destination of life is death, but we all should enjoy the journey, and some men will not be able to enjoy this journey if they kneel down in front of an unscrupulous wife.
I have deleted the last section of your post as per your request for confidentiality.
Regards
arun said
Dear Sirjee,
I am once again bothering you with the age old question:
Few facts:
She left matrimonial home on 27.11.05 with son (DOB 15.07.89-now 21 yrs)
She is continuously taking date after date as a delaying tactic in DV, 498A, Divorce case, property cases
She does not want to give divorce or live with me.
I want cases to be decided on merits as I have strong cases. Any procedures/advice to expedite the same? Case Court or High Court or Whom and How to address the same? She has stay on my property thru DV etc & my health is not too good. So if I die she gets in & creates havoc with my aged Mother.
I went to Chandigarh yesterday?
Advised by Advocates that nothing can be done here. In your cases put an application for unnecessary delays.
Q1: How can I expedite the Criminal Cases 498A/406?
498A/406 initiated on 20.06.07. She keeps taking date after date & the judge in 498A is giving me 1yr date everytime. Already 3years are over with 498A & the case is no where near starting even. I shall win this case. Somehow my lawyer is of the opinion to win & then file for divorce on this ground later. Quashing, he doesnt recommend as if I loose it (0.1% chances) she will put the judgement in all 11 cases & detremental for me.
Q2: How can I expedite the DV?
DV case started on 29.11.07 after 2 yrs of leaving my matrimonial home on 27.11.2005 (she left before the DV Act-have seen your blog for the 3 good judgements and noted) I have given appl U/s 340 CrPC. Already 8 dates & still no reply by her since then. When I asked the Judge why- He said so what will happen? Whats the problem? Have I given any contrary order? I said you have put stay on my property? & thats that??
Q3: How can I expedite Civil Case: Divorce U/s 13 Cruelty: where I am petitioner filed on 19.04.07 after her filing maintenance under 18-20 of Adoption Act etc?
She keeps taking date after date & the frequency of dates is once in 3 months at Faridabad.
Thanks & brgds
Arun
iluvshrutiverma said
Dear Shri Arun ji,
First and most important, take care of your health. This is the lowest point of your life, nothing more can go wrong, things can only improve, and they will improve.
What do you have to lose more that you are stressed?
Last weekend I was reading a book about bankruptsy. And the book said that for a CEO the few days just before the company declares bankruptsy are the most stressful. Once bankruptsy has been declared, there is nothing to fear. Then the lawyers and Government agencies take their own course, and the CEO does not have a big role to play.
Similarly, the worse for you is over. You lives your life so sincerely for so many years and what did you get in return? So try living life less seriously for a few months, and see whether you like that lifestyle. I can say from personal experience that I am a much happier person today than I was 5 years back (when I got married/ separated).
My preferrable strategy is to delay – just frustrate the enemy. They are the ones who went to court and are expecting miracles to happen there. You should just relax.
A1. I do not really agree that an adverse quash judgment will have an impact on all the other 11 cases.
A2. Stay on the property is not too bad. You can not sell but that is not a problem in the long run. The judge is in a way ‘fair’. This is the most ‘fair’ judges can get in this country. They would just keep giving dates and dates so that the parties get tired and sort out their differences outside the court.
A3. Maintenance will not stop at divorce. Divorce is worthless if you are not in a hurry to get married again. On top of that, there are several people who got married even without getting divorced.
There are 3 Crore cases pending in India. It is almost impossible to expedite the case progress. Hence, learn to enjoy the delay.
Vicky said
how can people marry even without getting divorced? i don’t get this. i am a hindu and my marriage was registered. if i marry again without awarding divorcing to my first wife, if i bring second wife then can’t my first wife sue or pull me in court ?
iluvshrutiverma said
Once a wife has already sued someone for 10 fake reasons, would be really be scared of one more case?
If you do get married again like this, then of course you will not take photographs of the wedding ceremony and send them to your first wife! It has to be done very discreetly. Ensure that she does not get hold of any proof that you got married again.
Vicky said
i got your meaning ILSV
can you tell me if we can file RTI asking to tell the amount of percentage of money of the settlement money , that is distributed between the judges or any other judical servant ?
if yes, then to whom RTI application should be directed?
share from what all kinds of money is distributed between the judges/any other judicial servant ?
Vicky said
I asked this question because if the world agrees to me in admitting that companies offer money as incentive to motivate its people to work more to increase productivity, then why can’t the indian judiciary be made accountable to explain why it dwells and makes a living on the money that is extorted out from the families of the male workforce of the nation that the indian judiciary pretends to service ?
i am sure some species of the parasites will read this.
iluvshrutiverma said
I hope you are joking that you will file such an RTI. The world agrees that employees are given incentive to motivate people but all that is legal. Have you ever heard an employee accepting openly that he takes bribes? Similarly no judge ever accepts that they take money. Moreover filing this RTI might be categorized as Contempt of Court and you might land into trouble “The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971”.
Roughly 30% of the money is distributed amongst the parties – your lawyer, her lawyer and the judge.
arun gulati said
Dear Shri Verma Jee,
Thanks your email. I replied but it has been rejected. pl give me some other id as my q’s are v personal (other than “no-reply….” as it is not accepting). alternatively you can give me your tel no. mine is 9810187693 at Faridabad.
tks & brgds
arun
iluvshrutiverma said
Namaskar Shri Arun ji,
The reply getting rejected might be a temporary problem.
There can not be any personal questions. We have been through very similar situations. So please feel free to ask the questions in public. Let others also know that it is not only them, it is the situation with so many men today.
Regards
Roh said
hi
# I agree that there should be no need for divorce if I am in no hurry to marry again. But what about the parents of our brethren who have been shown the way to get out of the house. After listening to the ill sayings from the DILs the parents do not come back at their house and this makes the parasites happy.
Even if the parents come back home then the parasites start screaming in the public that the parents are not allowing harmony get established between the couple.
# You have also mentioned that there are several people who got married even without getting divorced. I guess this applies to people of some specific religion only ?
iluvshrutiverma said
# Try to keep the wife and parents both happy. If that is not possible, then it is your choice. If you have kicked out your parents out of the house, what can I say? Your house, your parents – you do what you want
# No, I was not talking about other religions. I was talking about Hindus
roh said
thats why i like your response as you give the true picture of law.
Roh said
1 . but according to the Hindu law how can one marry without divorcing the previous wife?
2. i do not want to marry again but want to live with my family members. if my family members join me now then the b^^^ and her supporters start spitting venom in the society that my parents do not stop interfering the life of me and my wife.
i guess this is the way Indians live. some silently without complaining and they are called practical. some go behind the bars for complaining.