Dv case & warrant

Originally posted by :Adv. Chandu 09868332610

"

Take: I disagree to rata rataya statement of Adv. Chandu made to a fellow brother of Bar.


DV Act is a civil law, even though it is tried by the magistrate.  There is no provision to issue non-bailable / bailable arrest warrants qua application under Section 12 of the Act.  (It is a different case that if there is protection order passed by the court and its violation and non-appearance of the OFFENDER attracts NBW/Bailable Warrant).  Even Section 28 does not give such elbow room for the magistrate to issue non-bailable / bailable arrest warrants.
Take: That is what happens when what I wrote about The Act 2005 you donot read and then say above. I forecasted such “misuse" illustratively by both aggrieved person + advocate + by opportunists like you. Now re-read same interpretations as mentioned in my older 4 posts and next time pick some more lines out of my own past posts and quote to fellow Advocates (junior) as your gyan.


The problem with DV Act is that the magistrates, who are presiding officers in these cases are not trained properly about the provisions of this Act and they follow the procedure laid down in the criminal procedure code as a routine matter.
Take: Tomorrow Adv. Chandu will say even Hon'ble CJI is not appropriately experienced. So watch for this space. The main problem is by people like Adv. Chandu who wants more female clients and not Justice.  Had it not been so you would have been the first here to thread-bear Sections of The Act 2005 for common consumptions and or would have challenged The Act 2005 itself. Discuss with your mentor now - who tells Law to a Judicial Officer ? - is it not a Advocate who tells what is Law or is the other way round ! Simple basics you need to re-learn again it seems.


The advocates who should and could assist the court, some times do not do that for various reasons including the ignorance from their side itself. 
Take:  Adv. Chandu being advertised with his Cell no. as Adv. is telling a Junior Adv. that bete Advocates are not properly trained so are you also not properly trained. Instead of atleast advising a junior Adv. this is what budding Adv. hear from established Adv. as morale booster. Now the beauty of Adv. Chandu this reply in this brief has a paradigm shift as follows as his time pass activity when he cannot give legal remedy atleast to a Junior Adv.;

There are certain vested interests, who create mis-information about DV Act and create a fear psychosis among the ignorant husbands, so that they can chant solgans along with them about so called "gender biased laws".
Take: Gurudev first advise a Junior Adv. as per his query question what should he do step by step and what remedies a neighbor has and then the respondent / defended husband’s friend has then re-kindle chanting about 'vested interest'. here. Your slogans about vested interest are now bad tunes to my ears and so is re.: Versha Kapoor which I am sure you will pop again to me. If you want to know Law in perspective about re.: Versha Kapoor then say so I i will give you 2 full legal page gyan on Versha Kapoor to end all your attachment to this one and only Judgment that you are found of quoting time and again.


As a matter of fact, a friend cannot be a respondent in DV Case.
Take: Who says a friend cannot be respondent when in this brief a friend has already been made and admitted and further summon issued followed by BW and or a NBW is out which all takes months to do with atleast 3-4 hearing dates already passed and you say a friend cannot be made respondent!!!. Common Chandu don’t act so ignorant about The Act 2005. Even sitting here I can make you by name respondent and even get issued a summon if I want to come to that level had I entertain another female clients mind it. And don't think of giving me Prabhakar style threat of defamation suit - believe me once you quash my summon on DV you cannot succeed in any nature of defamation case. In case you think I am in doubt put here judgment on defamation on similar nature.


See it from other angle also, the reliefs those can be sought under DV Act cannot be against any friend of the husband's family.
Take: Instead of building further pentagrams guide a Junior Advocate on how the neighbour and or friend who is in another State right now are to be bailed out as BW / NBW cannot be recalled by R1 instance now ! Who will spend time / money status lost with police visit for serving summon and or warrent on neighbour and or a friends legal aid tell that too to Junior Advoate. Atleast this much you can guide ki nahi to a Junior Advocate if you have born repulsion to mens here.


If the applicant has any grievance against the friend, depending upon the facts, only criminal/civil remedy will be available to her but not definetely under DV Act. 
Take: Too late to spell this belated gyan as proceedings against a friend including a neighbour by address is already on floor of Court. 

"