need urgent suggestion

yes

Current status: Summons was answered by the corespondent and date has been given for filing objection.

Dir has been created but application for protection order has not been filed to the court. is that allright ? is it necessary to file teh application for protection order in the court ?

 If victim cries ‘rape’, it’s evidence enough: SC

Press Trust of India

Posted online: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 at 1630 hours IST

Updated: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 at 1658 hours IST



New Delhi, May 17: Courts can convict a rape accused on the basis of the sole evidence given by a victim unless her testimony is proved to be infirm and not trustworthy, the Supreme Court has ruled.

"If the totality of circumstances appearing on the record of the case discloses that the prosecutrix does not have a strong motive to falsely involve the person charged, the court should ordinarily have no hesitation in accepting her evidence," a bench of Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice S H Kapadia said.

https://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=67832

Also visit 498a.org

saveindianfamily.org

In india undergoing a trial greater than the punishment itself

Nitin,

I beg your pardon, but this case does not fall under section IPC 376 as the act of cohibitation was with mutual consent and that does not amount to rape, but this case can fall under section 493 of IPC - Cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful marriage. A beleif to the marriage and then cohabitation is what needs to be established.

Also it will be difficult to prove since the girl was also in live-in relationship where every act of cohabitation done as the couple may not fall under the preview of this act. The DV case is extended to lve-in realtionships and so this will be proceed as per the merits.

 What does the incident teach us? That we are living in a permissive society. Sweden is the most permissive society in the world. We are borrowing everything foreign including live-in relationship.

 13. The above referred provision makes it clear that any women who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the respondent can make a complaint under the provisions of the said Act. Further the "domestic relationship" thus defined as a relationship between two persons, who live or have, at any point of time, lived together. The provision does not say that they should have lived together for a particular period. Even as per the case of the petitioner, he had consensual s*x with her, but there was no promise to marry her. Thus, the averments made in the plaint as well as in the counter affidavit will make it very clear that the petitioner and the respondent had a close relationship and had s*x. As stated already, the Act does not contemplate that the petitioner and the respondent should live or have lived together for a particular period or for few days. From the averments made by the petitioner in his plaint and in his counter affidavit, one can infer that both of them seems to have shared household and lived together at least at the time having s*x by them. From the discussions made above, I am unable to accept the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the application filed by the respondent under the provisions of the said Act is not maintainable.

(2008) 3 MLJ 855 (Mad)



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Present : K. Venkataraman, J.



Case Number(s) : C.R.P. (PD) No. 238 of 2008 and M.P. No. 1 of 2008



Judgement Date : Wednesday 27th of February 2008

 Big problem.

Wife, live-in, domestic help all fall in the same category.

Lead a life of celibacy to escape their wrath.

 The oldest profession is now legal renamed as Live in or domestic reletionship.

What is your problem if a Man flaunts n no of women if he can afford it!

Marriages are criminalised and Family system is traumatised. Sex starved s*xogenerian alfa male judges and post menopause screwed up women are in the business of Family destruction.All in the name of women empowerment!!!

Yes, it is the big problem as the laws are interpreted diffrently by the judges for their own gain. The girl staying in live-in relationship can file the DV case, and get the releifs of the wife, but she cannot file for any other maintenance under various marriages act or 125 of CrPC. If the child is born out of the domestic relationship without marriage, the child will be the legitimate child and have the same rights as that of other children.But what will happen to the women of the domestic relationship? She cannot claim maintenance under HAMA also since the provision is for the wife.

In the above case, if the girl has decided to part, then she also cannot put IPC 493 against the boy, and no way IPC 376 will help since this is the mutual consent cohabitation.

 When you can make huge maintenance claim. residence order, custody orders ....why file multiple maintenance?

You just want harass!

Advocates in order to show up to their claints always try to impress by filing various cases!!

Dear Members

A few months back there was a similar case which was being heard in the Delhi High Court or the Supreme Court.  I do not remember exactly. In this case, the Hon'ble Judge found the girl equally responsible for her situation as she as a consenting adult entered into the live-in/physical relationship. Hence, the girl finally could not get much relief.

 The courts are wearing round the view that women are always the victim.

YES ANIL SIR,

 The courts are wearing round the view that women are always the victim.