Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The concept of right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes the right to live with dignity and the petitioners by running away from their parental home is not only bringing bad name to the family but also is violating the right of the parents to live with dignity and honour.”
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
The girl’s freedom was secured by directing her release from the custody of Shaskriya Stree Bhishekari Khikar Kendra but the relief of providing police protection was declined by the Court.
In the present case, the woman has clearly stated that she was not aware about her partner’s marriage and his children. Further, the Trial Court as well as the Appellate Court has also stated that the relationship between them, fell under the category of domestic relationship.
Take a quick glance at what the High Courts were discussing in this late Monsoon season
The Court stated that if any of the partners in a live-in relationship has minor children, none of the partners is required to abandon his/her duty to provide optimum care and protection to the minor children.
Madras High Court said that the reason given in the impugned refusal check slip reveals the patriarchal mind set of the registering authority, giving an underlying assumption that an unmarried woman above the age of 18 years cannot give her biological child in adoption.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
“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.”
Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that Supreme Court has emphasised on the broad interpretation of the term “wife” under Section 125 of CrPC and the presumption of marriage in cases of long cohabitation.
Madhya Pradesh High Court expresses concern on the choices that the youngsters are making these days and advice the need for discretion and awareness of societal implications.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
Allahabad High Court clarified that it is not against live-in relationships, but against illegal relations
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.
Punjab and Haryana High Court regarded the instant petition as a scheme to get away from criminal prosecution, just to obliquely obtain the seal of this Court on their conduct.
“The objectivity of the judges is the key to fairness of justice and the decisions have to be objectively determined according to the law of land and not by moral principles of the judge concerned.”
Punjab and Haryana High Court tagged the instant petition to be an abuse of the legal process for covering up the petitioners’ illicit relationship on being caught.
Allahabad High Court said that in case any disturbance is caused in the peaceful living of the petitioners, the petitioners shall approach the Superintendent of Police with a copy of this order, who shall provide immediate protection to the petitioners.
“The british concept of changing partner in every season cannot be considered to be hallmark of a stable and healthy society. The security and stability which the institution of marriage provides to an individual’s life cannot be expected from live-in-relationship.”