Offence means any act or ommission made Punishable by law for the time being in force and has the same idea as a Crime.

Respected Assumi Sir,

Thank you. So what is a "matrimonial offence" so to speak ? Any Authority to quote here please.

Rgds.

Dear Sir, as per the Matrimonial Causes Act of 1969, Matrimonial offence or Causes means:

"matrimonial cause" means-

(a) proceedings for a decree of-

(i) dissolution of marriage;

(ii) nullity of marriage;

(iii) judicial separation;

(iv) restitution of conjugal rights; or

(v) jactitation of marriage;

Please corect me if I am wrong as I would like to learn more from you in this aspects.

Most respected Assumi ji,

A choice or chance situation your kindself has put me IN which could be replied on lighter note as;

(To women) Please take time to ponder !.....
(To men) Is it Just a story ?......

Young King Arthur was ambushed and imprisoned by the monarch of a neighbouring kingdom.. The monarch could have killed him but was moved by Arthur's youth and ideals. So, the monarch offered him his freedom, as long as he could answer a question. Arthur would have a year to figure out the answer and, if after a year, he still had no answer, he would be put to death.

The question was: What do women really want?

Such a question would perplex even the most knowledgeable man. And to young Arthur, it seemed an impossible query. But, since it was better than death, he accepted the monarch's proposition to have an answer by year's end.

He returned to his kingdom and began to poll everyone: the princess, the priests, the wise men, and even the court jester. He spoke with everyone, but no one could give him a satisfactory answer.

Many people advised him to consult the old witch, for only she would have the answer. But the price would be high as the witch was famous throughout the kingdom for the exorbitant prices she charged.

The last day of the year arrived and Arthur had no choice but to talk to the witch. She agreed to answer the question, but first he would have to agree to her price.

The old witch wanted to marry Sir Lancelot, the most noble of the Knights of the Round Table, and Arthur's closest friend! Young Arthur was horrified. She was hunch-backed and hideous, had only one tooth, smelled like sewage, made obscene noises, etc.

He had never encountered such a repugnant creature in all his life.. He refused to force his friend to marry her and endure such a terrible burden.

But Lancelot, having learnt of the proposal, spoke with Arthur. He said nothing was too big of a sacrifice compared to Arthur's life. And the reservation of the Round Table. Hence, a wedding was proclaimed and the witch answered.

Arthur's question thus: 'What a woman really wants?'
She said, 'A woman wants to be in charge of her own life.'

Everyone in the kingdom instantly knew that the witch had uttered a great truth, and that Arthur's life would be spared. And so it was. The neighbouring monarch granted Arthur his freedom. And Lancelot and the witch had a wonderful wedding.

The honeymoon hour approached and, Lancelot, steeling himself for a horrific experience, entered the bedroom. But, what a sight awaited him. The most beautiful woman he had ever seen was sitting by the bed.

The astounded Lancelot asked what had happened. The beauty replied that since he had been so kind to her when she appeared as a witch, she would henceforth become her horrible and deformed self only half the time, and be the beautiful maiden the other half.

'Which would you prefer?' She asked him. 'Beautiful during the day .... or at night?'
Lancelot pondered the predicament.
During the day he could have a beautiful woman to show off to his friends,
but at night, in the privacy of his castle, an old witch!
Or,
Would he prefer having a hideous witch during the day?
But by night a beautiful woman for him to enjoy wondrous moments with?

(If you are a man reading this...) What would YOUR choice be?
(If you are a woman reading this...) What would YOUR MAN'S choice be?

And Lancelot's choice is given below...
BUT... please make YOUR choice first before you scroll down below... OKAY?

Knowing the answer the witch gave to Arthur for his question,
Sir Lancelot said that he would allow HER to make the choice herself.
Upon hearing this, she announced that she would be beautiful all the time..   
Because, he had respected her enough to let her be in charge of her own life.
Now... what is the moral to this story?

. The moral is...

1) There is 'witch' in every woman, no matter how beautiful she is !
2) If you don't let a woman have her own way, things are going to get ugly !

So, be careful how you treat a woman and always remember

IT IS EITHER ' HER WAY ' OR IT IS ' NO WAY ' !!

Now let me request collective wisdom of ld. LCI Members to title subject for our better understanding of  Family Law and purpose is to conclude if DV Act is retrospective or prospective !

Thank you Sir, I have copied your interesting posting with the conclusion that DVA being penal in nature it can not be Retrospective but Prospective.

Crl.P 3714 of 2007 delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh where in it was held

“It is a fundamental principle of law that any penal provision has no retrospective operation but only prospective. There is no allegation either in the report or in the statement or in the complaint on the 1st Respondent with regards to the acts of domestic violence that took place on or after 26-10-2006.Therefore continuation of proceedings against the petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of court”.

Sir,

So how come there are DIVERGENT VIEWS OF DELHI, ANDHRA PRADESH, MADRAS, PUNJAB & HARYANA, RAJASTHAN AND MADHYA PRADESH HON’BLE HIGH COURTS on SAME PENAL PROVISIONS !

VIEW OF DELHI HIGH COURT:
The impugned Order dated 07 – 07 – 2010 has been passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court relying upon a coordinate bench decision of the High Court in ‘Smt. Savita Bhanot Vs. Lt. Col. V.D. Bhanot’,Crl. M.C. No. 3959 of 2009 (22-03-2010) whereby the Delhi High Court has held the Act to be retrospective in operation.

VIEW OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT:
However, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in the matter titled ‘U.U. Thimmanna & Ors. Vs. Smt. U.U. Sandhya & Ors.’ Crl. Petition No. 3714 of 2007 (02-08-2007) has held the Act to be prospective in operation.

VIEW OF MADRAS HIGH COURT:
The High Court of Madras in the matter titled ‘Dennison Paulraj & Ors. Vs. Maya Winola’ Crl. O.P. No. 7156 of 2007 (02-04-2008) held the Act to be retrospective in operation.

VIEW OF PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT:
The High Court of Punjab & Haryana  in the matter titled ‘Smt. Gita Vs. Smt. Raj Bala’ M. Crl. Misc.  No. 47145 of 2007 (26-11-2008) has held the Act to be prospective in operation.

VIEW OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR :
The High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in the matter titled ‘Smt. Hema @ Hemlata & Anr. Vs. Sh. Jitender & Anr.’ M. Cr. C.  No. 3874 of 2008 (07-01-2009) has held the Act to be prospective in operation.

VIEW OF MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT:
The High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the matter titled ‘Shyamlal & Ors. Vs. Kantabai’ M. Cr. C.  No. 3874 of 2008  (29-04-2009) has held the act to be prospective in operation.

Rgds.