photos in matrimonial case

Dear Manu,

It is evident that the other side is only alleging but has not proved yet for which purpose evidence needs to be adduced (meaning thereby that the testimony of these person will be of paramount importance).

Best Regards

Daksh

Just say / do;

If these pics are bald allegations;

1. "because my husband is suspitious of even having tea with my working office collegues it is not in my interest to stay with him"

2. "tomorrow he will produce another set of pics where I am shown to be closely standing in a crowded bus with some unknown male passengers and he will further allege that I am having affair with males while commuting to office, hence my character is assasinated beyond repair regulalrly by these bald allegations which is not conducive enough to lead a normal marital life"

3. Take help of a photo studio and create morphined images of models with him in different postures and produce those photos in Court alleging him to be of loose character and to cover up his wrongs he is alleging as above thus not conducive to lead a normal family life with such a man.

Rgds.

I do agree with my Ld. friends.

how can wife claim CRPC125 if she is working, and may be husband has produced those pic to prove that wife is working and is not entitled for maintenance as she is earning independently

swatirswatir,

she is not earning actually. her brother is into some business and she is assisting him thats it. she is not paid at all. and he doesnt have any document to show that she is working. somehow he wants to create some probs. thats all is his intention.

So is assisting in a business would not be held as a job???

I'm just curious?????

PHOTO SPEAKS.

OBSERVE THEPHOTO, TRY TO FIND WHETHER ANY 'INTIMACY' AT ALL THERE OR NOT.

IF INTIMACY IS THERE, HOW MUCH?

WHETHER IT IS BEYOND LIMIT OR WITHIN LIMIT.

EXPLAIN THE PHOTO ACCORDINGLY.

IF FEEL DIFFICULT, CONSULT ME BY PM.

THE WORD ' colleague ' INDICATES THAT SHE IS A WORKING WOMEN.

USE THE WORD ' FAMILY FRIEND ' OR SOME SIMILAR WORD TO PROTECT THE INTEREST OF YOUR CLIENT.

As per Evidence Act if photos are "denied" irrespective of one seen in them or not then it is corrected with production of negatives.


In today's Rama Age of digital cameras he may not be able to produce negatives from a aim and shoot camera (since they have almost become obselete) so to speak which has "embedded time stamp on each strips" so there goes the evedence is my opinion in a prme facie interim maint award suit.


Going to office be it of her relatives does not mean one is working it has to be corrected with detective work followed by Owner as witness statement / salary records / attendece register production and all these can be denied based on Nanadani Satpathy Vs Union Of India SC Law and BTW case in hand is that of S. 125 CrPC PRIME FACIE so to speak so there goes the pressing need of play of S. 91 CrPC authenticity followed by inference of production of wife's photo in some office be it of her relatives office and there pops interim maintenence prime facie meanwhile so what is left in a prime facie maint case my friend recovery and refund of interim maint later on I say a BIG NO !!!!!!

Rgds.
PS.: Emphesis here is on two words prime facie and now read the reply he he

The above reply is for wife's side to bail her.

Now below add-on is for husband side

1. If his wife has a mobile handset. All he has to do is ask for production of cell tower details from cell operator of last 13 months. If the cell tower location is within 1 km. radius of her relatives office from 9.30 till 5.30 hrs. which will show in cell tower location report then SHE IS WORKING AND NOT ASSISTING is the straight forward PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT as well as becomes matter of PERJURY if not working Affidavit submitted in Court.

Rgds.

no document can be relied unless or otherwise it is proved

sir arun kumar,

he has no right to have access to the call details of his wife if sim s in her name. correct me if i m wrong. as per ma knowledge mobile companies do not give call details unless fir is prepared against the owner of the sim. it is her privacy and husband cannot interfere.

regards

Aniket Giri,

assisting in business is not a job if it doesnt fetch her any income.

if husband is able to prove that she is also earning some mount of money when assisting in business certainly i have no case here.

regards

Arup,

yes u r right. i should not use the expression 'colleague'. it amounts to admission that she is employed. thanks for the suggestion.

regards