- This topic has 12 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by Anonymous.
26/01/2012 at 10:35 AM #584AnonymousGuest
In this Thread we are covering Petition to Rajya Sabha for Section 498A IPC.
Please read these posts before add your comments or required Amendments
We need your inputs for Amending petition with Rajya Sabha.
PLEASE ADD YOUR AMENDMENT POINTS
26/01/2012 at 10:40 AM #3265AnonymousGuest
We already suggested some here almost 5 years back.
26/01/2012 at 10:45 AM #3266AnonymousGuest
Most of the women to Blackmail , harass and get maitenance and Divorce file 498A.
1)till 498a decided no intrim/maintenance/
2)Before Divorce all pending cases to be completed.
14/02/2012 at 5:46 AM #3267AnonymousGuest
24. FIR of 498A, Should not be reason for Divorce/Maintenance or Custody
is not correct. It will be big harrassment for husband as he will be forced live
with his tormentor. FIR should be reason enough for divorce. And if the reason
for FIR is frivolous divorce should be without maintenance.
Also we need to add that
judgement (even for Anticipatory bail) should contain the list of evidences
submitted by both the parties to support their claims. Many times judges simply
ignore the profound evidences submitted by the husband and base the
order/judgement on vague statements/evidences submitted by the so called wife
In my case s/he actually accepted before judge in front of everybody that s/he
had not undergone a (crucial) medical test recommended by lady gynaecologist. It
was shocking in addition to so many other instances. Medical report consisting
of two lines didnot even had panel doctors signature. Till date we do not have
individual medical test details.
Even during the medical examination few doctors who were known to (transgender)
wife’s side shouted on gynaecologist and warned her dire consequences.
14/02/2012 at 6:33 AM #3268AnonymousGuest
Most of the time women apply for divorce just on FIR of 498a or DV not man,
Clause 24. FIR of 498A, Should not be reason for Divorce/Maintenance or Custody – for women, not for accused.
14/02/2012 at 6:42 AM #3269AnonymousGuest
updated with some more points. http://mynation.net/proposal.htm
15/02/2012 at 9:36 AM #3270AnonymousGuest
Whenever a criminal charge is pressed against husband and additionally wife files for divorce based on FIR, it only means (without any abiguity whatsoever) relationship has ended atleast from wife’s side. There is no point in continuing with the relationship.
In such a situation law (and husband) should any way allow divorce. But additionally husband should be granted anticipatory bail to fight the 498a case. And if there is no evidence of physical injury caused to her, husband must be cleared off all the charges.
15/02/2012 at 9:56 AM #3271AnonymousGuest
I have also observed many cases, in which wife in the name of willingness to continue with the marriage invokes sympathy clause of law on the part of judges (who is never bothered (or rather law exempts them to judiciary context free) to know the reality (even if it is broadcasted by media)) (sometimes it is even deliberate). This way 498a takes form of even more deadlier weapon of extracting money as well as inflicting as much injury to the husband and his parents. Particularly when wife family have been traditonally rowdies and husband have only been sincere citizen who have never paid attention to darker side of human activity and his parent mere retired service men as clerk etc.
15/02/2012 at 10:45 AM #3272AnonymousGuest
What I understand the last point
28.Police / IO / Judges ignore any Evidence given by Accused, to be penalised as per Law or subjected to disciplinary Action
we can add that
judgement statement (even for Anticipatory bail) should contain the list of evidences submitted by both the parties. Actually judgement/order statement should be in a particular format.
15/02/2012 at 11:46 AM #3273AnonymousGuest
We cannt dictate what will be the format; but we can say both side evidence should be taken into account and judgment should deliver accordingly; and if ignored judge should be penalised as per law.
16/02/2012 at 4:07 AM #3274AnonymousGuest
This is the basic flaw with our law. Why should judge need this liberty not stating the list of evidences submitted by both parties in the judgement/order statement. This liberty allows so much of corruption to thrive. There is joint nexus between judges advocates and criminals. It is the criminals who are the source of constant income (including via references) not the innocent people.
16/02/2012 at 6:34 AM #3275AnonymousGuest
We can probably take care of the evidences. As far as I know petition (enlisting evidences) in the courts are public documents. We can get them from various courts and build a repository of evidences and corresponding judgements/orders. This will be mammoth task as it may happen court people may not co-operate.
19/02/2012 at 4:23 AM #3276AnonymousGuest
no wonder coz most of our laws just copied from British, which they drafted 200 years ago. and so far not a single person born to draft laws for india, nor india copied good laws from Britsh. [ http://mynation.net/mhact.htm read this british law.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.