Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
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.
“Though justice has got to be administered in accordance with the law enacted by the Legislature. The concept of justice is elastic and is imperceptible. There can be no hard and fast line constricting the power of the High Courts to do substantial justice.”
“Right to privacy of Aadhaar number holder preserves the autonomy of the individual’s right to privacy which has been conferred primacy and admits of no exception under the statutory scheme”.
“A choice and will of a woman to exercise residential choice at her natal home should not be viewed through patriarchal prism to deny her the residential status there”
“The very fact that the wife had not only claimed but also accepted pendente lite maintenance during the appeal from the first husband fortifies that the marriage was not finally dissolved.”
The impugned order held that the fathers of the parties were real brothers and so, the marriage between the parties fell within the meaning of sub-clause (f) of Section 3 of Hindu Marriage Act, which defines the terms of degrees of prohibited relationships.
“Article 21 of the Constitution gives Protection of Life and Personal Liberty to all persons whereby it is the inherent right of every individual to exercise personal choices, especially in matter relating to marriage.”