Archive for the ‘Domestic Violence Act 2005’ Category

Pune court rejects woman’s plea after husband exposes lie

August 20, 2013 6 comments

Techie said she was jobless, sought maintenance, after the trail it was proved that the Women Techie was lying and that to she lied on she filed affidavits but still Court has not initiated action of lying or giving false evidence in the COURT u/s 340 CrPC FOR COMMITTING OFFENSE OF PERJURY.



A 26-year-old married woman moved the court against her businessman husband for monthly maintenance claiming she is not working. However, her husband challenged her application and provided details of her monthly salary along with other documents to prove that she is employed as a software techie.

As a result, the court of judicial magistrate (first class) SS Patil rejected her interim relief for maintenance and passed strictures against her.

Manisha Dighe married Baner-based Anuj (33) (names change to protect their identities) on June 26, 2009. However there was a drift in their relationship and in 2012 Manisha moved an application before the court seeking monthly maintenance of Rs1 lakh and temporary accommodation under relevant sections of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 against Anuj, his mother and his two sisters.

Manisha in her plaint alleged, “Anuj used to get random calls from a woman and when I asked him, he replied it was his girlfriend’s call. When I confronted him about it, he started beating me. Later he started demanding Rs3 lakh cash for purchasing a flat. Anuj’s mother and sisters poured oil on me and tried to set me on fire but I somehow managed to rescue myself.”

She added, “Anuj’s sister’s engagement broke on February 2011 for which Anuj wanted to take revenge against her fiance. He started forcing me to register a case of rape against that fiance to defame him. I left the house and I had also registered a complaint with Chatuhshrungi police station in this regard. Now I am pursuing my postgraduation and have no income. On the other hand, Anuj earns Rs5 lakh per month ”

Anuj’s lawyer Pratibha Ghorpade argued,”Manisha is falsely implicating Anuj and cooking up a story before the court. Manisha is working in a Baner-based company and to prove the case, the head of the human resources department of the Baner-based IT company must be summoned in court.”

Accordingly, an official of the HR department submitted her income tax, her salary slips which mentioned that she is earning Rs52,000 per month which includes house rent allowance, conveyances and other expenses.”

The court observed, “It appears that Manisha has not come before the court with clean hands. During the pendency of main application of Manisha, she is seeking interim relief in the nature of interim maintenance before the court. It was her duty to come before the court with clean hands but as mentioned above I have come to the conclusion that she has not come before this court with clean hands. She has completed BE and is earning handsome income and therefore temporary relief is rejected.”


Poison Pill at Jhalianwalah baug: DV Act & 50% Asset Bill for Wife

November 25, 2011 Leave a comment

Q: If you were stuck at Jhalianwalah baug with your family where there is a blind shoot out. What would be your 1streaction after safe guarding your family?

Well I would try and protect myself as well, but with no option left I would end my life gracefully rather than the disgraceful bullet.  

Cases like 498a, 406 on whole family, 125 etc, DV Act & 50% asset share bill are like Hostile Bullets of General Dyer. 

In other words its a Hostile Takeover by the unscrupulous wife; where as getting Disowned would be The Graceful Poison Pill.
Takeover by a Traditional Bahu (not the kaykay’s):Traditionally speaking, when a newly wed bahu used to come to her matrimonial home she used to be on a performance spree and had a learning curve (closing the cultural gap between the 2 families) and act as a force of balance between the two. It used to be a job of a matured lady. This virtue of hers often made her to earn the ownership of the house. This ownership (like company shares with dividend) was measured from the growing number of keys hanging on her waist. A Casual, friendly, just and responsible takeover. With a rightful appending of name as, that is to say owner of that house.  The bride over the years earned the house control and that used to be effective takeover, merger and acquisition.
Unearned Hostile Takeover by DV Act / Proposed 50% asset share bill (the likes of Kaykay): But somewhere during the time span, this process got lost and only the result was kept in mind. Now a days what women want is the control of the house minus the process of earning, new proposed 50% share in hubby’s asset laws are suggesting that they want the share but not the accountability, calling responsibility / duty as the atrocities that they faced since generations, being held accountable would be a contempt of a loosly drafted law. Thus causing problems and this takeover in economic term becomes a Hostile Takeover. Further reports are pouring in of the natives of the home being thrown out or forced to vacate by clever methods by the pro(women) wife lobby.
Feminist have got so carried away that they are now accusing the grooms of being smart, they get disowned…., but what are they trying to hide? (strictly from dowryless marriage point of view), the girl too gets conveniently disowned when bidaai takes place. And I am not justifying the wrongful torture on brides as we are discussing willful dowryless marriage and  I am countering the argument which I once heard by the feminist on the television that if the mother in law never worked how come she has the house in her name? The answer is, she did a friendly takeover by becoming the operations manager of the house. And one cannot argue that one won’t work for the family (indoors and/or outdoors) and also would not contribute to the expenses but will want to have stake in all.
The bride is actually executing a Hostile Takeover of a stake in the Guy’s assets right from the parental property to the Now newly illdefined matrimonial home till the interim alimony to the final settlement in with trump cards like kids, possession of stridhan, 498a threat, DV threat or execution, but thank god some judges are sensible enough not to get carried away.  But again 50% asset bill inMaharashtra is feared to have “consumption” of wife in hubby’s assets what so ever earned or inherited. But her earnings may be protected.
Poison Pill at Jhalianwalah Baug: I stumbled upon this concept when I was surfing for Takeover of companies, for my last employer. HOSTILE TAKEOVER is a bad practice and economics has combating tactics called the poison pill which is rightfully fair. Every dote has and antidote similarly every blackmail has a whitemail and in economics every hostile takeover has methods to counter it and its all legal. To which feminist cannot complain. What the hell has the cunning bride done to stake claim? Just rights and no duties? And we would be losers in any case, so it better to channlise the demise of ownership. As we are left with only a poison pill? Yes its better to lose to Apne than to Paraye due to unfair laws. To save Indian family from being victimized these rational steps have to be taken. Now they ask what is a family without a wife? But then what is an Indian family without parents and siblings (mother, sister).
Further everytime feminists complain that boys get disowned from the family, they sound like the viruses of the Cancer, complaining “that how dare they amputate our territory of existence in their body to SAVE THEIR BODY. Now that we are empowered we do not want them to use medicines, since there has been a history, of Science winning but we are empowered Cancer Viruses and we can’t lose……” Well let’s face it, disowning is not a pleasant process neither is amputating. But it is the obvious solution to stop the vested interest empowerment bug from spreading it like cancer in the family that is progress friendly. (how wrong is the term empowerment, instead it should be equality)
Protecting one self from a virus that is deadly for the body is not a crime. Similarly a family that disowns the abla affected and wedded son, is doing a sensible thing. As they are right in justifying by asking a simple question that “it took us 4 decades to build a home and how come the same goes post 7 drills of saptapadi overnight? With no responsibility, she is welcome to own the responsibility and earn the dhan and not loot it overnight.” And that too after rightfully empowering the daughter for inheritance, who is a human too and not a dump material.
They say that flat belongs to the mother because of tax reasons and failsafe business reasons of the father of the groom. But well the mother had to earn the flat by taking over certain responsibilities of the house and had absolutely no hostility what so ever in that and it was till date safe for the male to gift the flat in her name unlike today where adultery by women is contested to be a civil offense. And live ins are any day beneficial for the women.
And the bottomline is, those martyrs (shaheed’s) at Jhalianwalah Baug who decided to jump in the well (poison pill) and die rather than die to the hands of General Dyer’s Gunmen are still in the minds of those victim husbands who decided to disown assets (life) rather than giving it to the oppressor armed with misused law practice. Hence there would be more husbands who would prefer to be disowned and rightfully lose their rights and assets to their family rather than to a oppressor who is a gold digger.
Mumtaz earned the taj in her name like a white knight and did not pass a court order then. A Rickshawallah told me that “The Thakurs earned the land in Kandivali after all the selfless service for lifetime to a generation of a Childless Marwari Business Family now known as Thakur Complex and the Famous Will of Priyamvada Birla that went to her Chartered accountant R S Lodha. These are earned wills by virtue of service and not terror.
The amputation or poison pill stands justified here as well as there has to be a logic in staking claim. With growing cases of Domestic Violence Act misuse that allow access to the wife in matrimonial and new proposed bill of 50% ownership in husbands assets as feared would be a Hostile takeover (Kabza) by wife, then definitely Poison pill is the only solution for husband rather than succumbing to logicless bullying. And hence even the Apostles of the August bodies have mentioned such laws and clauses as one of the examples of a loosely drafted laws. One such bill is feared to land in Maharashtra with wife’s asset as stridhan with no share for hubby, but hubby’s total asset would entitle 50% share for wife to begin with.
Analyse this.
Courtesy:- Jinesh Zaveri
Fight for Justice

A crusaders blog for inspiring thought.

Stand up for your rights

Gender biased laws

MyNation Foundation - News

News Articles from MyNation, india - News you can use

498afighthard's Blog

Raising Awareness About Gender Biased Laws and its misuse In India

The Blog

The latest news on and the WordPress community.