@Amit: "How does the man prove that he did not conceal his first marriage to his second wife?". Very good question. Wife is saying, he had concealed. Man is saying "No I told her". What happens between them in private has no witness. So nobody to support any one of them. How court will decide?
Man had arguments with wife. (I read this case today morning). When all members of husband's family except MIL were not there, the parents, brothers of girl came. They took the girl back to parental house along with jewellery. Husband is doubtful that she may claim that she had not taken jewellery with her/the husband is refusing to give jewellery to her. Supposing there are some jewellery also belonging to husband's mother in the jewellery she had taken, then it becomes a case of "theft" under IPC?
One more case. One of my friends committed suicide after coming back from honeymoon (in the year 2000 I think). Nobody knew what was the reason. When the girl's side came to know about the new, they all came to my friend's house and when they left house it was found that the photos, vidoes etc relating to marriage were missing. What is the reason? They might wanted to prove (if necessary) that marriage between my friend and that girl had not taken place at all.
We may be proud of improving/put in place scientific methods of investigation and admitting evidences and bringing the accused to justice, but people are losing basic human values the other side. Fear of police, knowledge of law and evidences makes people forget their basic human values. What does it mean when a woman who indulged in heated arguments with husband takes extreme care in taking away jewellery kept in Almirah? What does it mean the people who came to be part of grief of a family that lost its son, keep an eye on evidences to be disappeared from that house?
And a husband or wife wants to prove cruelty against spouse. What do they do? They do some secret activity like voice recording or video recording. Otherwise whose evidence will be taken by court as acceptable? I do not think people should be driven crazy like this by law to gather evidences against their own family members secretly. People lose faith in each other if they do like this. That is why criminal law should not find place in family related issues unless a crime is reported in a conflict which is punishable under Penal code, otherwise. All family issues should be, otherwise, resolved through civil proceedings only, because a criminal proceeding vitiates the atmosphere required for reconciliation and sets people, one against the other involving them in taking unnecessary care and caution to defend themselves and in that process ending up treating their own spouse/family as their enemy (for lodging criminal complaint) because of fear of punishment under Penal Code.
In one of the cases relating to divorce and simultaneous criminal proceedings Supreme Court observed, “That apart, in our view, filing of a divorce petition in a Civil Court cannot be a ground to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code as it is well settled that criminal and civil proceedings are separate and independent and the pendency of a civil proceeding cannot bring to an end a criminal proceeding even if they arise out of the same set of facts. Such being the position, we are, therefore, of the view that the High Court while exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Code has gone beyond the allegations made in the FIR and has acted in excess of its jurisdiction and, therefore, the High Court was not justified in quashing the FIR by going beyond the allegations made in the FIR or by relying on extraneous considerations.”
High court had earlier given a judgment quoting interalia that when a divorce proceedings are pending in Family court, the criminal proceedings are not necessary. Apex court arrived at the above conclusions. I am of the strong view that in every family related crime, though it finds place in Penal Code, there is a Mediation Centre at High Court level, Counsellor in police Stations, CAW and several other agencies intending to work for reconciliation among accused and the complainants, and when that is the spirit behind involving these agencies then it is necessary that when a proceeding under HMA is pending in Family court, before the Family court decides on the matter, there shall be a stay on all Criminal proceedings, because a criminal proceedings vitiates the atmosphere for reconciliation between families in dispute or the parties belonging to family in dispute. A criminal proceedings increases bitterness among accused and complainant due to hardships they face during facing inquiry, getting bail, facing Trial etc. Once criminal proceeding is set in motion, the chances of reconciliation become bleak and remote thus defeating the very purpose all these agencies formed to help the litigating parties arrive at some reconciliation. In comparison to that a proceeding in a Family court is not that harmful because it is a civil proceeding hence there still remains better scope for reconciliation between litigating parties.
An Advocate is only concerned with "What is". A politician is concerned with "what shall be". Sometimes Advocates too should think like politicians, otherwise, reforms are not possible.
