Husband defense struck off, can he cross examine the wife

I got the relevant judgement after two days of extensive search https://indiankanoon.org/doc/85055/ I already supplied one supreme court citation but the judge asked me to come with exact similar situation. Anyhow I got it. Now the judge can't deny my right, even if it denies I can approach my application HC with above Punjab HC judgement. I hope one HC accept/consider another HC judgement.

Sachin brother, You are absolutely spot on. I am theoretically good but practical hiccups because of heavily biased judge influenced by recommendation from one of the retired judges. You can't believe, while crossing my wife in M.C.case the judge didn't allow me to ask a single question on dowry allegations. And even didn't allow me to ask this simple question "if you lose the case would you reunite with your husband". I argued with the judge to allow me to ask what ever I want subjected to the condition of not causing any indignity to my wife. But she (the judge) didn't allow. My wife's side have very high influence so whomever I may appoint as lawyer the result may not be better than what I am doing. I am ready to bear the consequences, I don't have any regrets. I hope I can do it with the help of this group except my friend-cum-foe I.e. none other than Helping hand :-)

Originally posted by : sai narayana
	I got the relevant judgement after two days of extensive search https://indiankanoon.org/doc/85055/ I already supplied one supreme court citation but the judge asked me to come with exact similar situation. Anyhow I got it. Now the judge can't deny my right, even if it denies I can approach my application HC with above Punjab HC judgement. I hope one HC accept/consider another HC judgement.

 

This "online version of judgement" might not help you because case no is not mentioned in this online judgement. If you want to submitt this, take print out of this and first go to court library and search this judgment with case no.

Originally posted by : Sachin
	Originally posted by : sai narayana I got the relevant judgement after two days of extensive search https://indiankanoon.org/doc/85055/ I already supplied one supreme court citation but the judge asked me to come with exact similar situation. Anyhow I got it. Now the judge can't deny my right, even if it denies I can approach my application HC with above Punjab HC judgement. I hope one HC accept/consider another HC judgement.   This "online version of judgement" might not help you because case no is not mentioned in this online judgement. If you want to submitt this, take print out of this and first go to court library and search this judgment with case no.

Brother,

I got this Case number: CR 3387 of 1999. D/d. 3.10.2000. Is it allowed.

https://www.lawfinderlive.com/jlink.aspx?q=16954&p=1&pos=0&qType=6&tidp=82297&tid=14583

Well done, I also tried to find but i couldn't. Good

I am attaching one more judgement of SC for you. See if it can help you.

 

I had already shown that judgment to the judge and because of that judgment only I came to know the rights of a defendant. But she (the jduge) asked me to come back with a judgment matching to exact circumstances of my case, "the interim maintenance S24 not paid then defense struck off, still Cross-examination and arguments allowed".

After two days of thorough search, I got the Punjab and Haryana High court judgment.

And one more from Delhi High court but not full judgment due to technical error in Delhi high court website. https://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/Browse/Case?CaseId=108002197200

Originally posted by : Sachin
	I am attaching one more judgement of SC for you. See if it can help you.

Brother,

Do you have a sample P.S. Memo on which we obtain the acknowledgment from our life-partners (suckers) whenever we pay to them.

Originally posted by : sai narayana
	Brother, Do you have a sample P.S. Memo on which we obtain the acknowledgment from our life-partners (suckers) whenever we pay to them.

 

Sorry i don't have!!

You should ask her about her bank a/c number and you should transfer the amount to her account

Modula India is a comprehensive decision on this point and if the Court does not agree with it, without referring to any wilfully disobedient conduct of the husband, it is an idiot! If every precedent were to be on exactly the same set of facts, with exactly the same arguments forwarded by parties and exactly the same conditions of justice and equity bearing upon the mind of the Courts, there will be no need to locate ratio of each judgment, but simply to copy-paste such an exact precedent and change the parties' name.

In Kupil Dev Aggarwal v. Rajni (as you pointed out, good job), the Court followed Modula India only, in permitting cross-examination; the High Court was not doing anything particularly new or ground-breaking, only applying the already settled law to the similar circumstances. 

Similarly, in Kulbhushan Seth v. Seema Seth & Ors., as a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court reiterated this right, it was merely following Modula India. In Satish Kumar v. Meena, the Delhi High Court obserbed that the husband whose defence was struck off could  seek to demolish the respondent's case-by cross-examination ONLY. 

In Raman Kumar v. Uma Kiran, the Himachal High Court permitted cross examination, provided the husband deposited a part of the maintenance (which I cannot fully agree with but then, who am I heh? And for whatever it is worth, it might be used as a last resort precedent in the alternative, if everything else fails and you have paid, or are ready to pay some portion of maintenance).

I'm sharing here links to reported copies of the following judgments:

Modula India v. Kamakshya Singh Deo

Kulbhushan Seth v. Seema Seth & Ors.

Satish Kumar v Meena

Kupil Dev Aggarwal v. Rajni

Raman Kumar v. Uma Kiran;

They may be produced as authoritative reproductions of judgments before any Court [because if I read your dear Court correctly, if you end up with IndianKanoon before it, the Ld. Court may refuse to take note because its not authoritative]! Be aware of the fact though, that if the Court is prejudiced against you (as you seem to perceive) and possesses an iota of smartness, it'd use the adverse observations in all these judgments to severly curb and restrict cross-examination by you and your final arguments, but, I guess that's the best you have given the circumstances as they are.

Also, if your questions in cross-examination are relevant, you cannot be prevented from asking it just by stating that it may hurt the dignity of the abla naari; if that were so, let the  lady specifically ask for moderation and let the Court then have in camera proceedings.

Which brings me to the aspect, as somebody did point out, the fact that things have reached a state that you are fighting for a right to cross-examine and are being obstructed from conducting cross-examination by the Court, you might consider taking the help of some lawyer or at least these men's rights groups (though I cannot claim to have even a hearsay experience with them).

 

Originally posted by : Atul (public ID)
	Modula India is a comprehensive decision on this point and if the Court does not agree with it, without referring to any wilfully disobedient conduct of the husband, it is an idiot! If every precedent were to be on exactly the same set of facts, with exactly the same arguments forwarded by parties and exactly the same conditions of justice and equity bearing upon the mind of the Courts, there will be no need to locate ratio of each judgment, but simply to copy-paste such an exact precedent and change the parties' name. In Kupil Dev Aggarwal v. Rajni (as you pointed out, good job), the Court followed Modula India only, in permitting cross-examination; the High Court was not doing anything particularly new or ground-breaking, only applying the already settled law to the similar circumstances.  Similarly, in Kulbhushan Seth v. Seema Seth & Ors., as a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court reiterated this right, it was merely following Modula India. In Satish Kumar v. Meena, the Delhi High Court obserbed that the husband whose defence was struck off could  seek to demolish the respondent's case-by cross-examination ONLY.  In Raman Kumar v. Uma Kiran, the Himachal High Court permitted cross examination, provided the husband deposited a part of the maintenance (which I cannot fully agree with but then, who am I heh? And for whatever it is worth, it might be used as a last resort precedent in the alternative, if everything else fails and you have paid, or are ready to pay some portion of maintenance). I'm sharing here links to reported copies of the following judgments: Modula India v. Kamakshya Singh Deo Kulbhushan Seth v. Seema Seth & Ors. Satish Kumar v Meena Kupil Dev Aggarwal v. Rajni Raman Kumar v. Uma Kiran; They may be produced as authoritative reproductions of judgments before any Court [because if I read your dear Court correctly, if you end up with IndianKanoon before it, the Ld. Court may refuse to take note because its not authoritative]! Be aware of the fact though, that if the Court is prejudiced against you (as you seem to perceive) and possesses an iota of smartness, it'd use the adverse observations in all these judgments to severly curb and restrict cross-examination by you and your final arguments, but, I guess that's the best you have given the circumstances as they are. Also, if your questions in cross-examination are relevant, you cannot be prevented from asking it just by stating that it may hurt the dignity of the abla naari; if that were so, let the  lady specifically ask for moderation and let the Court then have in camera proceedings. Which brings me to the aspect, as somebody did point out, the fact that things have reached a state that you are fighting for a right to cross-examine and are being obstructed from conducting cross-examination by the Court, you might consider taking the help of some lawyer or at least these men's rights groups (though I cannot claim to have even a hearsay experience with them).

No use of appointing any lawyer unless I change my stand to pay the amount becuase the judge herself said i am the first one in this court to contend my right to cross even if defense is struck-off. Today the court took the copy of Kupil singh vs Rajni, Punjab and haryana high court and the adjuourned the case to 23.03.17 to read the judgment and analyse it.

Regarding prejudiced judge, it's not my perception it's fact. My salary is 33k to 39k p.m. and my mother's who is 57 years salary is 3k p.m. but the judge granted my wife 15K per month maintenance that too without any documentary proof from my wife's side where as copy of my pay-slip was the documentary evidence from my side. If the judge is really unbiased and had any suspicion about my pay-slip in her mind, she should have ordered me to file it on affidavit or the court can itself procured it from my organisation, railway authorities directly. Out of my 39K, the rent itself costs me 10K. So left over is 29k out of which the travelling expenses to the court itself costs me 3k to 5k per month as it is 1000km far away from where i am working. And I have to look after my father(63) and mother(57). My pleadings supported with documents have no value where as my wife's mere pleadings have full value and got full maintenance as much as she claimed, much to the surprise of each and every one whoever came to know my story, and from then onwards I removed my lawyer and fighting as party-in-person.

Please guide me how to produce my basic phone's inbox messages as evidence in the court to substantiate my pleadings that the relation was good when my wife was with me.

No point being touchy-sensitive towards what I say, man!

Be that as it may. If you have 'changed' your stand, and are now paying or willing to pay maintenance, the entire line of judgments become pointless; why would the Court need to study Kupil Dev then? Once you pay the maintenane, make a demand to the Court for setting aside the order striking off your defence and then lead your evidence. Until that order striking off your defence is not modified/set aside, you cannot lead any email or any evidence to substantiate your pleadings.

Originally posted by : Atul (public ID)
	No point being touchy-sensitive towards what I say, man! Be that as it may. If you have 'changed' your stand, and are now paying or willing to pay maintenance, the entire line of judgments become pointless; why would the Court need to study Kupil Dev then? Once you pay the maintenane, make a demand to the Court for setting aside the order striking off your defence and then lead your evidence. Until that order striking off your defence is not modified/set aside, you cannot lead any email or any evidence to substantiate your pleadings.

The defense struck off is in Divorce proceedings but no such hurdle in M.C case under Crpc125 so I have to file my evidence on next date in it.

sai .. i have exactly same situation.. i read above discussions which seem to be 2 months old.. whats the status now.. were you 'struck off the defense' or you could convince the court? 

my wife has filed an application to struck of the defense as I have some dues pending.. but I am out of job since 4 years & have been trying to earn my living some how (not getting jobs as i am quiet 'popular' in my industry as an accused in DV case & regular visitor to courts & PS.. no company wants to hire person like me.. but I am still trying to earn my living.. she is MPhil, BEd, but sitting home claiming that her degrees are lost (stolen by me).. i had paid intermin maintainannce when I had money, & job.. now i dont have either.. 

 

When ever i go they are not allowing me to cross exam. I couldn't attend 3 successive dates so they set me as exparte and decreed the judgment. I am contemplating whether to file set aside in same court or directly file appeal in high court because even if i was successful in setting aside also the court will not allow me to cross exam as the outstanding dues are not cleared.