Isn't this bill in contravention of Fundamental rights?
There is clear cut Definition of "Irretrievable breakdown of Marriage" in the proposed marriage laws amendment Bill, and that is given by way of avoiding to come to a definition of the same by deferring to give the definition.
Same is the definition in report 71 of Law Commission.
The above mentioned 30 years old report was also devoid of definition, but using the same text, today there is hustle bustle to add the new ground without definitio of the same, this is really mindless action on the part of our govt.
Definition says that:
Let's defer the definition of IRBM and take it, for the time being, as "Factum of separation of spouse for 3 years or more' be a sufficent and conclusive proof of IRBM".
So by giving an Illustration/Example (which is error prone in itself) of IRBM, the indirect definition is given , it is to be taken as a mandatory one for the Family Court (Court shall treat the 3 years of separation as a sufficient and conclusive proof of 'IRBM') i.e. Family Court can't refuse to accept the conclusive proof of IRBM.
So opposite party would go there only to receive verdict of Court!!!!!
Here 'cluprit' would get a reward for misdead!!! (if wife has walked out for no cause, she gets the choice of reaching to court and get the decree for fer fault!!! ........... Good Hell!!!!)
Is this new proposed gound available to Both?
Answer:- No ................ Only wife has unfeterred ground available !! ..... and if husband manages to please' decision makes ....then husband also can just simply sideline wife who's trying in vain to stop divorce
If husband takes this ground and files petition, then wife can oppose it on financial grounds (and if Court comes to conclusion as to assessment of financial needs of wife and if husband is ready to pay then Court has no option but to grant divorce and wife has no remedy to save her marriage)
If wife takes this ground and files the petition, husband can't even oppose it and can't save marriage from the a runaway female spouse and rather wife gets the reward for her misconduct.
There is no need to prove who's at fault for factum of separation!!!
It does not matter if the petitioner itself is the cuprit!!!!
Wife can simply walk out of marriage and wait for three years and then goes into court and files affidavit that there is factum of separation and continuation of the same thereafter as of date and duration exceeds 3 years ..... that's it.
But after that wife still can ask for share of husband property even though she has walked out/ejected herself without reasonable cause from the matrimony/cohabitation.
So females would marry rich guys and part ways with lovers for a few days, and the join him back and while walking out also would claim a booty in husband's wealth!!!!
Hindu sanctity to marriage is completely erased by this bill. There won't be any case of faulf grounds. All would get converted into IRBM overnight.
And Family Court would be reduced to 'divorce registration cells'
Actually new bill is adding a 'no faulf divorce' after 3 years.
Its like talaq facility offered only to Hindu women, and male-separation period of 3 years starts... and only it reains a formality to get the decree from court, Court even doesn;t have to be satisfied as it is required (for namesake) in MCD........ Once the separation of 3 eyars of more is proved .... enough.
Is this the law that our society really wants.
If there is such an urge to make divorce easy, why the hell we should get it decreed from Court? Make laws like muslims .......... Why this farse?
If Husband or wife goes into HC or for some other reason delay the case again 'it would only be a dream again to get speedy divorce' ........................ Divorce is something which only one party wants speedily .............. if both parties want it then there is MCD already.
Isn't this bill in contravention of Fundamental right ( COI Art 21 violation - right to life and personal liberty Right to live with dignity ) ...where reain the dignity of the man if wife simply walks out of marriage and she isn't required to give any explanation whatsoever why she deserves to get it?
Isn't this creating a class/overemphasis of classificaition and preferential treatment at the prejudice of male gender, without reasonable cause/justification?
Isn't this bill in contravention of Fundamental right ? Isn't this creating a discrimination against males in the pretext of expedicious divorce? and husband to be left remedyless and would be inflicted with stigma without a fair trial ( COI Art 14 violation) which husbands can't even have defense.
