False 498a & visa process by private firm

Agreed with autohide147

I do agree with Autohide...but this is a sticky situation. On your H1 form, the question have you been arrested, they are not looking for the answer which is correct as per Indian law. They are looking for answers correct as per US law.

Besides, u will get ur visa even with a 498a, as many have previously.

Thanks everyone .. much appreciate and thankful

Thanks Sainath - Well no arrest has been done. 

So for this question

"Have you ever been arrested " My answer should be NO.

"Have you ever been charged with criminal offenses" My  answer should be  NO.

"judge frames charges against you" My answer should be NO.

Thank you so much everyone for your suggestions and valuable input .

what are other columns

1. Take copies of recent daily orders from court with you to visa interview.
2. If visa officer asks more specifically about divorce etc. be transparent about ongoing case and show the orders if he asks. 
3. Lots of husbands have got visas with ongoing 498a even at advanced trial stages without any problems. US citizens are explicitly warned by the US state department that if they are planning to attend any wedding in India they can be dragged into vexatious 498A cases. US State Department has also issued circular about misuse of 498a to consular officers.
4. Only thing they care about is that you are cooperating with court and not absconding. In my experience recently no visas are being denied for 498a case especially for USA.

"US State Department has also issued circular about misuse of 498a to consular officers"

This forum can enhance knowledge if a copy o fthe same could be available.

Sudhir Sir: advisory was issued in 2004 and was in effect for number of years. It was widely reported in national and international news, it specifically singles out 498a because number of US citizens passports were confiscated by police in frivolous cases.

https://www.indiawest.com/blogs/dowry-fraud-is-still-a-big-problem-in-the-u/article_dde9faa8-c430-11e4-9fa2-9ff983acf041.html

The U.S State Department has warned Americans that: “Furthermore, since the police may arrest anyone who is accused of committing a crime (even if the allegation is frivolous in nature), the Indian criminal justice system is often used to escalate personal disagreements into criminal charges. This practice has been increasingly exploited by dissatisfied business partners, contractors, estranged spouses, or other persons with whom the U.S. citizen has a disagreement, occasionally resulting in the jailing of U.S. citizens pending resolution of their disputes.” 

Similar advisory was issued by Canada. Please use google search to enhance your knowledge Sudhir Sir.

Dear Autohide,

"Similar advisory was issued by Canada. Please use google search to enhance your knowledge Sudhir Sir."

U R new to the forum,I presume UR not a lawyer either by academics or profession.U have replied to the post of Sr Adv Sudheerji,that should have been the end.The above advice is unwarranted.If U R not a lawyer,should we think that all UR replies are via google search.Hence restrain URself from such things.The admin of LCI is a keen watcher of such replies against legal experts.This is basically a legal forum but other non legal members are also permitted to express their views,that too to the querist directly.

"I presume UR not a lawyer either by academics or profession.U have replied to the post of Sr Adv Sudheerji,that should have been the end.The above advice is unwarranted."

Sainath Sir,

The above presumption about my qualifications as well as advice about my response is unwarranted.

I highly respect your inputs to the forum. I may disagree with your opinion at some times, yet I have lot of respect that you take the effort and time to express your inputs for the benefit of the whole community. The value of forum increases for everyone if differences of ideas can be freely expressed without undue criticism and policing.

Thank you.

The difference in opinions can be expressed through PM's but not publicly,which creates confusion to the author.The debates between the members and legal experts derails the original query.That's the reason I keep on mentioning that our concentration should be only on the querist.Any worng suggestion would create a havoc in the already existing problems of the querist,whether it is self made or not.

Initially our reply should be for amicable settlement of the cases that the querist is involved.Our replies may satisfy the querist but hardly accepted by his lawyer,who has his own ideas and way of approach towards the case,whether benefitting his client or not.