LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Parth Chandra (none)     30 March 2011

About Domestic Violence Act

Dear experts,

I have two doubts regarding DV Act as below.

1) The Residence order clause says that an agreved women may ask (majistrate may order) for separate residence as per respndents current status (accomodation) or may ask (order) for rent for the same to be paid to agreved person- Now what are the prrofs/points a majistrate would be looking into before giving a separate residence/rent order is not clear....I mean if respndent says that he is ready to accomodate her in his own premises then on what ground majistrate may order separate rent/residence?

2) The protection order clause says that on a single testimony of the agrived wife, respondent should be imprisoned - Isn't it the violation of very fundamentals of human rights of respondent and also against Constitution which says that 1000 criminals should be left free but no single innocent should get punished!?!?!?

Can learned friends though light on above two clauses of DV act and enlighten me about the procedure/proof upon which they are ordered?

Thanks,
PC



Learning

 5 Replies

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     30 March 2011

@ Author

Read thoroughly the below two posts and a much refined version challenging DV Act is still pending before Hon'ble SC based on which many a HC’s have granted stay of DV proceedings on one or the pretext latest being your Gujarat State’s case [BTW tell writers since you happen to be from Gujarat what happened on 10-03-2011 in the below case
J ]


https://498amisuse.wordpress.com/2011/02/12/domestic-violence-act-gujrat-hc-on-retrospective-aspect/



1.

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/PWDVA-LAW-INTERPRETED-Part-I-21794.asp



2.

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/PWDVA-LAW-INTERPRETED-PART-II-21815.asp



If still in doubt then you are welcome to come to Hon'ble SC and challenge the same by showing courage and conviction if you really believe in Fundamental Rights as guaranteed under COI as you also say in one of your sentences in above post otherwise kindly sit back and enjoy till SC gives some views on pending challenge matter before her. 


[However, Indian Men's Rights group need ground level activists not too many question seekers !]

Avnish Kaur (Consultant)     30 March 2011

DV act has a dual nature just like light has a particle as well as wave nature.

it is a criminal sheep dressed in  civil costumes.


 

1 Like

Parth Chandra (none)     31 March 2011

Thanks Avnish Ji, But I feel my questions remained unanswered which were regarding two kind of orders that can be passed against respondent. I wanted to know the scenarios or prima facie proofs relying on which Judge may pass such order as both these kind of order particularly the protection order clause simply says that on a single testimony of wife, respondent can be imprisoned which is congnizable and non-bailable. @TajobIndia Sir, Aap jis school ke head master hey woh school me meine abhi Jr. KG start kiya hey (came to know about these family laws since one year when encountered), So I expect at-least some degree of resonability in your so called GYAN because everyone tries to fight their own battle and in process may help others directly or indirectly which I do as a member of SIFF (Ahmedabad) by sharing various judgement and knowledge gained from internet and for which I don't require certificate from anybody. I hope you would understand above para of mine which is not at all personal and I am very thankful to you for reminding harrased husbands again and again about the importance of helping others while fighting their own battle. Moreover I am more so thatnkful to you because you (D. Arun Kumar) was the first one who shared two important judgement with me regarding crpc 125 in I guess june or july 2010. They were the first judgements ever I read by which I could better understand reasoning/thought process of law and Judges and since then I have been helping to various harrased people with the advice and judgements which might be useful to them by scanning through at least 5-6 judgements every week. I know it may not be enough but it is the best I can do as of now due to personal and physical limitations. Thanks, PC

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     31 March 2011

@ PC

1. Get in touch with Atit

2. The idea was to make SIFF (Ahmedabad) chapter stronger

3. I am aware of your work there.


All the best.

1.1
For residence Order the prime facie trend is she should be not drawing any HRA and should be a destitute (principles of S. 125 CrPC applies). The husband should be having his own property as well as (may) be drawing an HRA.

1.2. For protection Order the prime facie trend is 'means of husband and willful neglect"

Hope you are satisfied with a crisp and short answers, now I still like you to read thoroughly the above two links as that writer wrote them nicely and brush up arguments and create from Ahmedabad chapter precedent on the go. .

Interested to know the outcome of Gujarat HC link mentioned above, any idea?.

 

Mallik Karra (Done with AIBE)     31 March 2011


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register