LCI Learning
Master the Basics of Legal Drafting in All Courts. Register Now!

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

A VICTIM OF MRS HITLER (JUSTICE SEEKER)     21 May 2010

ALLEGES DOM VIO BEFORE AND AFTER SHE STYAED WITH ME

DEAR SIRS....FIRSTLY THANKS FOR THE EXPERTS ADVICE WE GET...

As some you are by now must have known my case.....this femalel called my wife

has filed a dom vio case against me WHERE CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS ARE FILED:

1. she has ADMITTED as per her affidavit...she stayed with me from 1998 to 2007 ....AND SHE HAS REPORTED DOMESTIC VIOLANCE BEFORE 1998 AS WELL AS AFTER 2007 .AND ALSO IN BETWEEN .....AND THE LAST EPISODE SHE SAYS HAPPENED IN AUG, 2009.....

2. SHE HAS ADMITTED THAT SHE LEFT HOME ON HER OWN  WITH HER BROTHERS....(TO PROTECT HERSELF) ..ON THE FINAL DAY.....AS WELL AS ON EALRIER OCCASIONS.....

3. SHE STAYED AWAY FROM ME AND JOINED A JOB IN ANOTHER CITY  FROM OCT 2005 TILL OCT 2007....

4 I ALSO FEEL SHE HAS PREAPRED A FALSE MEDICAL REPORT .....

HOW MUCH IS THE CASE IN FAVOUR OF ME ......???

THX IN ADVANCE

 

I JUST NEED YR OPINION ON TEH TWO VITAL POINTS ...OF THE



 4 Replies


(Guest)
I am in the impression till date that this forum is of Lawyers and general public for interaction and not of Hon'ble Judges and general public. However since you want pre-judging then; 1. U should be aware that DV Act is prime facie and she has a prime facie case against you based on your 1-4 points that much is pre judged from the face of it, hence, 2. It would have been better if you were supposed to have writtne the relief she prays for in her complaint case to give u idea on more pre judging so, 3. Good que. but lacking details hence prime facie case is there for interim reliefs but finality needs to be proved with evidences. All the best defend the charges with evidences and witness examination. Rgds.

A VICTIM OF MRS HITLER (JUSTICE SEEKER)     22 May 2010

thx mr arunji...pls tell me what do you mean by 'DV case is prima facie...' does it mean that

it mean that the respondent will be held guilty just on prima facie charges...

ALSO SINCE THE CASE IF FULL OF CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS ..WILL THE COURT NOT

DISMISS IT

A VICTIM OF MRS HITLER (JUSTICE SEEKER)     22 May 2010

ARUN JI ..SORRY ..THE OTHER thing u asked was......her prayer ...i will tell you the PRAYER  says....

.1 that she should not be prevented from entering the house....I HAVENT...SHE LEFT (AS I HAVE STATED ABOVE)...AFTER FILING THE CASE SHE CAME ENTERED THE HOUSE WITH HER GOONDA BROTHER ON THE CONTRARY THREATENED TO THROW ME OUT.(MOBILE PROOF) .....,AGAIN LEFT AFTER THAT...

2, child should not be prevented from school.......i HAVENT SHE WITHDREW HER ..ON THE CONTRARY I BEGGED THAT THE CHILD'S SCHOOL SHD NOT BE INTERRUPTED.. (sms PROOF)

3. that respondent should not call her or write letters to her ....AON THE CONTRARY SHE HAS CALLED/sms ME (PROOF)

4 AND MOST IMPORTANT....any other order the hon ACJM feels right.....and in the preceding paras a request for Rs 10,000 formedical, Rs 4 lakh for losses, Rs 4 lakh for another has been asked for.....

All these statements only prove her mental/emotiional instabiluty ....THX


(Guest)

1. Contradiction in statements needs colloboration by evidences and witness statements since DV procedure follows CrPC The Code but esentially Civil in nature, so you are struck in two procedures before "dismissal" will ever happen.
2. If para 1 is not understood then read in simple layman's illustration of what is DV as "prime facie" projected by a "lady":-

PS: Applicant here is wife and Respondent here is husband like u n me n so many unfortunate others..................
Source of below illustration: https://skmanrai.instablogs.com/entry/matrimony-under-senseless-dv-act-husband-wife/

Applicant: How is the food today?
Respondent : Good. Thanks.

Applicant: (after tasting the food) but there is no salt! Perhaps I forgot. Why didn't you point it out?
Respondent : If I point out such things it may be considered as "humiliation" under DV Act Section 5 (Chapter 5) - 3(a).

Applicant: Why are you talking like that! I'm your wife! Don't you love me? And stop telling me about your funny Sections and Act ... I don't know nothing about it.
Respondent : Yes, I do love you.

Applicant: I love you too. Now tell me how much do you love me?
Respondent : Well, I wish I had an answer but I could not find the quality & quantity of love in DV Act that is required to be given by husband to his wife.

Applicant: I don't know what are you talking about!! Anyway, look outside, it's raining... let's get romantic and make love!
Respondent : I would love to make love but nothing in DV Act defines the strategies, do's & don'ts of making love, including the ones required to be complied with pre, during and post lovemaking. If I attempt to even show my affection towards you it might be misconstrued as "s*xual" and "physical abuse".

Applicant: Darling !!! Don't be such a bore... and I haven't heard you calling me "honey" from long !?
Respondnet : I'm not a bore and you know that. However, being a true Indian it's my duty to abide by the laws meant to protect women. I cannot call you "honey" coz it might come under "name calling" of DV Act. You might accuse me claiming that by calling "honey" I meant that you were the home of poisonous "honey" bees!

Applicant: Was it a joke?
Respondnet : No no, it was not a joke. DV Act doesn't allow me to joke with you as joking might be taken as "ridicule".

Applicant: I think you have gone mad !! Anyway, I know how to get you back on track. You know I got a call from my ex boy friend today when you were in office !!
Respondnet : Ok.

Applicant: Ok? What ok? You used to feel jealous to know about any male calling me! I love your possessiveness towards me!
Respondnet : I'm afraid but the DV Act doesn't allow me to stop you from talking to and/or meeting anybody you want to at any time... be it your ex boy friend or your new lover, be it at our home or outside. If I try to stop you it might be taken as "prohibition or restriction to continued access to resources or facilities which you are entitled to use or enjoy by virtue of "domestic relationship". I don't even have any rights to stop you from spending days & weeks with him, even if you plan that trip by selling all the items from our house and taking away my whole month's salary!

Applicant: This is going nowhere! I think you don't love me anymore !! I don't know what to do !! It's better if we don't talk at all for few days.
Respondnet : I do love you but the law has not provided me with relevant guidelines and suitable acts on the quality & quantity of love I am legally bound to give you. I don't mind keeping quiet as per your instructions but one of the judgements by Hon'ble Supreme Court says that "spouse's silence may amount to cruelty". I am helpless in the hands of law.

Applicant: To hell with your law !! For God's sake... can't you be your normal self with me !??
Respondnet : I am normal, but if I do not suppress my normalcy under the requirements of DV Act you might send me to jail !! I'm just trying to be a good citizen of India and serve you & the womankind. You can have me either as your normal husband or as a dog controlled by women biased laws. Tell me which one do you want?

Applicant: I want my original and normal husband.
Respondnet : Then wait till at least the DV Act and 498A are scrapped. Until then every happily married husband will abide by the requirements of DV Act to ensure they do not bypass the law; and every victimised husband will continue fighting against such gender biased, senseless and family-breaking laws.

Enjoy the fun of being DVeyed just like me brother :-)
It is the most clumsily drafted enactment of Law post independence thanks to WCD / NCW.
Rgds.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register