Can a wife who is not in touch since 8 months, file false dv

yes ,she can file,acc. to me............my wife file d.v. after 1.5 years dissertion.

yes she can after some year also

@dr. pawan - does filing dv after long time like in your case weaken the case? How did you tackle this in your case?

She can file on false grounds.  Most of the DV cases are all false.

But recently Mr Tajobashi has posted one order of Supreme Court according to whcih limitation period of 1 year is applicable in DV cases also.

@Bhaskar: does it mean DV cases filed after 1 year are not accepted?

yes ,case is weak,as adv. rajeev said,mostly it is on false grounds.in my case................after 8 month dissertion i filed for RCR(SEC 9),ON RECONCILIATION MY WIFE REFUSED TO COME BACK ,AFTER THAT FILED FOR D.V..................,even in  protection officer `OFFICE SHE REFUSED TO SETTLE THE MATTER.AND I M STILL FIGHTING...................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOW I M SERIOUSLY  THINKING FOR DIVORCE ON THE BASIS OF CRUELITY AND DISSERTION. I ALSO NEED ADVISE  FROM EXPERTS PRESENT HERE             ....

When she's not been in touch for 8 months there's no reason as to why she should show up in a court.

She can file..she will file for MONEY and for harassing the husband...this is the easiest way to earn tax free money...

No other way..CONTEST THE CASE WITH FULL EFFORT..AND GRILL HER..

Yes, Tajobs had written a good analysis of whether a DV case is applicable retrospectively...

Tajobs will the right guy to answer...

Actually, DV is a new act and there has been very less or no analysis of the sections of the Act by the apex court..here lies the difficulty..

Regards,

Ranbir

498a,DV case, Divorce case, Dowry Prohibition cases cannot run simultaneously/concurrently on the same allegations even if there are a few differences. Differences if any prove her mens rea of guilty intention. Only one case can run . 498a as it is totally unconstitutional. Wht type of a Supreme Court you have here which has not gone for a Judicial Review of these Acts/laws. All allegations should consolidated in the divorce case.

1.498a is rendered void as it finishes the "Divine" nature" [sacramental]  nature of a Hindu Marriage.

2. I noticed that many couples don't take seven steps, bribe PUJARIS/WHATEVER to finish ASAP. So couples run around the sacred fire but there's no one to notice that seven steps and video tape. I guess most Hindu Marriages are void at the time rites themselves and which rites have to be fully recited to make Hindu Marriages divine. So victims can tell the courts that there marriages were void right from day one relaborating details of incomplete ceremonies.

So in case seven steps have not been taken or video film is not there to show the seven steps then marriage can be got delcares as void.

Any case law/citation please.

tx

yes she can filed

Bhaskar / Ranbir / Victim etal,

I stand by my interpretation on limitation of DV based on quoting THAT Hon'ble SC Judgment which some of my ld. brothers have reservation correctly interpreting as they are struck to "divorce - ex wife mention in it" but omit to read SC has used 'fortified" word next to limitation act and it is other matter that no two case facts are same but point of law applied in all cases are always same. I hope my ld. brother especially Adv. Chandu found of commenting on my replies will this time read down 'fortified' word in THAT Judgment and pick up words and phrases interpretation of SC from any law journal of his choice.


However here is a cat out of the bag for ld. brother Chandu if he is shy to tell readers and it is expressed by me as follows;


There is a well quoted (11 times till date) a very old SC judgment which says for family law matters no limitation period applies and it stands valid right from all civil matrimonial cases to criminal matrimonial cases and no guess work I will mention here which all Sections of criminal / civil cases are not covered at all under limitation act !!! This is one line of arguments adopted by ld. brother when he want results for his female clients from Judiciary and challenges takes from other ld. brother stating "no limitation in DV".


Well, the other Judgment which says 'limitation applies' more so over for DV Act is already quoted long time by me here which is under contentious scanner of ld. brother Chandu because it happens to be a case of a Indian husbands and thus "it is not on footing of limitation" is his take here to me and shows me re. Varsha Kapoor judgment which is totally on different footing is any layman's viw leave aside my view on Varsha Kapoor.


But we advocates exactly know which Judgment to quote and where and what could be outcome in case 'limitation act' is the call for relief sought for husband as our client :-) 


Now does ld. brother Chandu needs me to spell out the old SC Judgment citatory reference which says no limitation period applies to any matrimonial case which mostly wife’s side old seassoned lawyers use but it is a long forgotten Judgment of SC worth a quote here !

@ Irene

I fully agree to your take on matrimonial laws of the land. We are working on putting them under Common Law platform being Commonwealth country of Her Excellency J

Lots of ground work needs to be done but then it depends upon prudent advocate brothers to set the doing right.

Also I am pleased to know your views on unconstitutionality of say S. 498a IPC which is just one tip of the sinking family laws of the land there are many others which are more killing for Indian joint family system borrowed from Land of opportunities i.e. USA / UNIFEM sponsored.