Thanks Roshni.

No comments on the merits of the case, but below lines draws my attention from this NEWS item...

I wish to add other view point which I have always been insisting that "maintenance" should be seen more as a duty than as a right.

In this case the facts reveal that her parents spent Rs.2L + GOLD + Rs.90k in the year 1993 (mistakenly posted '92 in last post). However, in year 2011 they are poor? I heaviliy doubt it!!!

In my view parents can certainly maintain their daughter and her children, however post marriage it is uncanny duty of the husband to take care of his wife and children. This is why husband is liable for payment of maintenance not because the wife's parents are poor but it was found by the "Court Of Facts" that he was guilty of domestic voilence.

Payment of such maintenance amount shall act as a deterrent and punishment for the husband and shall keep pinching him (may be) for rest of his life and he would realize this every moment that he violated the sacred relation of marriage and he committed a grave mistake.

Having commented on the case, I parallelly wish to state that phenomenon of "interim maintenance" is very vague, inherently. It should be amended and modified to accomodate "return of money" by the payee to the payer if the claims are found false or not proved by the "Court of Facts".

//peace

/Saurabh..V

In many cases even if the court orders maintenance, whatever amount it is , it can be seen that the payee party usually delays the payments or withhold the payments and then the aggrevied person has to get into another struggle to get court orders implemented.

@Gauri

Just a small technical error in your above post::

the payee party usually delays the payments

It should be Payer party .... as payee is the one who receives the money :)

Moreover, these delays are due to both reasons

- one that the husband is NOT guilty and don't want to let go his hard-earned money.

- second that the husband don't want perform his duties.

However, in both these cases supports the provision of "refund" of interim money, if the case is found false or if the case goes in favor of husband... And if the case goes in favor of complainant, it's already paid so "refund" shall not come into picture at all!

Law should be made/amended/executed to bring/maintain/increase harmony in the society. Law has to evolve ever as it's directly dependent on the changes in society. Making the law and then forgetting about it would only act in detriment to society as a whole than any good it woudl do for minute number of aggrieved. Unless every law does not have a provision to STOP MISUSE and also punishment for false complainants, these situation can never improve..... And the day is not far when the common man would loose all faith in the basic structure of our constitution.

//peace

/Saurabh..V

@Saurabh

minute number of aggrieved - Are you really convinved that the number of aggrieved is minute? How many real cases have you seen?

Unless every law does not have a provision to STOP MISUSE and also punishment for false complainants, these situation can never improve.....- I agree with this statement that every law should have punishments for false complaints, be it from anyone.

I do not wish to advocate any one side as aggrieved, it can be either the petitioner or respondent, but the truth is that we can have any number of laws and the any number of judgements but implementing them is really a challenge.

And the day is not far when the common man would loose all faith in the basic structure of our constitution- Our consitution does not depend only on a few laws and its loop holes.The Law comes into existence due to certain societal needs based on years of real life observations. Any Law is not framed just out of blue. This applies to all the Laws. Once again, all laws are misused and it is the social responsibility of each one of us to stop misusing it. You cannot hold the constitution responsible for it and loose any kind of confidence in it.

@Gauri

Your last words draw my attention to the fact that your thought process does not allow you to think out of the box.

You statement is only confined to the fact that laws are brought into action after a thought process. However, do you think that what laws we have, and whatever changes have been brought were as speedy as possible?

S.498A IPC was enacted in the year 1983 and S.304B IPC was brought in year 1987 (if I'm right). But the application started in latte 90s and today when we are past 2010, misuse is rampant.

It took (1983-1947)=(37)years to bring these laws. That too happened after the International Conference on "Protection of Equal Rights of Women" was held and India was a party and then only it ratified it's laws.

Now post 1983, it's been (2011-1983)=(28)years and yet the govt. is to revisit these laws. Constitution gave powers to these "buggers" (neta) who think more about their perks, salaries etc. but are least bothered about the social security of cittizens of India!!! Needless to mention how many times salaries have been revised and how efficiently it was increased for all neta!!

Jan Lokpal Bill was first argued in year 1968 and since then it has been (2011-1968)=43yrs, and yet the govt. is reluctant. And when in a hurry to supress the outcry they brought a law they say,-

"Complainant shall have minimum 2yr punishment as compared to 6months punishment for accused".

Is this the law you are talking about?

We have "AGI" (Attorney General of India) .. "SGI" (Solicitor General of India" and so many well experienced lawyers on govt. panel and yet they come out with laws which favor neta personally???? Do you think such eminent people would need soooooo many years to rectify a fundamental misuse problem in any law???

Making a law does not take more than 6months when you are living in year 2011 and when we already have a fundamental law called Constitution. One should have will to perform the act..

//peace

/Saurabh..V

//peace

/Saurabh..V