Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

TNN, Nov 26, 2010, 03.32am IST

AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat HC on Thursday slapped a penalty of Rs 1 lakh on Dashrath Devda, president of Akhil Bharatiya Patni Atyachar Virodhi Sangh for protesting against alleged misuse of domestic violence laws. A division bench fined him for filing frivolous PIL and for wasting court's time.

Devda had approached the HC by way of filing a PIL demanding judicial interference in the alleged misuse of protection laws for women. He was demanding a protection in legislation for men, who are according to him henpecked by their wives.

Devda has been claiming that women have abused the laws, which are in favour of them, but certain protection for men is also required against the misuse of the legislation. He filed this PIL, which came up for hearing before a division bench. When Devda began arguments as party-in-person, the court asked him to withdraw his PIL because his demand was to amend the legislation. Refusing to pay any attention to what the court was hinting at, Devda continued to argue how women in this country are worshipped, and no law is required for their protection. However, the chief justice repeatedly asked him to withdraw the PIL.

Ultimately, the court imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on Devda and asked him to pay the money to the Self Employed Women's Association — an NGO working for women empowerment. The court has directed Devda to pay the amount of penalty within two months.

Devda and members of his association often stage demonstrations and take out rallies in the city in protest against the domestic violence laws. They also help men in court proceedings, who face charges of domestic violence from their spouses. In this PIL also, Devda tried to assert their views that different pieces of legislation favouring women are misused, and ultimate sufferers are the family members. The association has been protesting against anti-dowry law of Section 498A of IPC, alimony related provisions in Section 125 of CrPC and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/Man-fighting-for-harassed-husbands-fined-1L-by-HC/articleshow/6991947.cms#ixzz16KwY9gFj

Hiding a prior divorce from husband also amounts to cheating: Gujarat high court

Hiding a prior divorce from husband also amounts to cheating: Gujarat high court

The Gujarat high court recently gave two significant judgements in cases lodged by an NRI couple after their divorce. Justice Akil Kureshi of the high court ruled that if a woman conceals her previous marital status (including a marriage that had ended in a divorce), it amounted to cheating. In such a case, the husband can file a police complaint against his wife, the court said.

The judge also held that a woman can file a criminal complaint against her husband if he does not return her belongings after their marriage had ended in a divorce in a foreign country.

According to the case details, Mitesh and Tanya, who are currently citizens of the US, originally hail from Kheda district. They had got married with the consent of their respective families but their marriage soon ran into trouble and they divorced in the US in 2007. But the bad blood between the two did not end there.

Tanya filed a complaint in Nadiad under the dowry act among others, alleging that Mitesh had not returned her belongings which amounted to Rs20-Rs 25 lakh. These were given to her by her father at the time of the marriage but they were still with Mitesh's family, Tanya claimed. She demanded that Mitesh and his family return her belongings as she had divorced Mitesh in the US.

Mitesh had also filed a complaint at the same police station alleging that Tanya had cheated him as she had not disclosed the fact that prior to their marriage she was married to another boy and had divorced him too.

In his judgement, Justice Kureshi gave the green signal for filing of a police complaint against Tanya for not disclosing to Mitesh the details of her previous marriage and divorce. But the court turned down Mitesh's plea that Tanya's police complaint against him and his family for not returning her belongings be quashed.

The court also refused to entertain Tanya's argument that even if Mitesh's allegation was accepted as true, it did not constitute an offence as her previous marriage had been annulled by the competent court in the US.

On the other hand, Mitesh in his complaint had argued that Tanya had concealed details of her previous marriage even in the marriage form. This amounted to cheating and forgery, he said.

"Tanya had made a false declaration saying that she was unmarried, after which he had agreed to marry her," Mitesh declared in his complaint.

In her complaint demanding the return of her belongings, Tanya stated Mitesh and his family had not returned what belonged to her. As per the terms of their divorce settlement, the two parties were supposed to return each other's property, she stated, adding that Mitesh was now saying that he and his family did not have any of Tanya's belongings.

Can't say husband impotent without proof: Guj HC

Can't say husband impotent without proof: Guj HC

Ahmedabad, August 25:  Gujarat High court hearing a divorce case has rejected the family court ruling granting divorce to a couple on the ground of impotency.

However, the high court upheld the family court order of divorce between the same couple on grounds of desertion and cruelty.

One Rajendra Dalal had challenged a family court's order granting divorce to his wife Dharmishta on the ground of impotency and cruelty, in the Gujarat High Court.

A division bench of Justice Jayant Patel and Abhilasha Kumari, last week, rejected the man's appeal, saying that the petition was devoid of merits.

The court, however, observed that there was no conclusive evidence to prove that the man was impotent or the marriage was not consummated. "The finding of the Family Court on this point, therefore, cannot be endorsed," it observed.

It said that the decree of dissolution of marriage has been passed by the Family Court under the provisions of Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, on the ground of cruelty and desertion and not under Section 12 (impotency).

Also, the Family Court, while granting divorce had recorded cogent findings on the ground of desertion and cruelty against the man, the court added.

(with PTI inputs)

http://www.zopag.com/news/cant-say-husband-impotent-without-proof-guj-hc/25786.html

…………….

HC: Can’t say husband impotent without proof

Ahmedabad, August 25, PTI:

The Gujarat High Court has observed that specific medical proof was required to determine whether a husband was impotent or his marriage cannot be consummated when a wife seeks divorce on this count.

A division bench of the HC comprising Justices Jayant Patel and Abhilasha Kumari has set aside the grounds for a verdict passed by a family court vis-à-vis a divorce petition. In the case involving an earthquake victim husband and his wife, the family court had granted divorce on the grounds of impotency and consequent ‘cruelty’.

Rejecting a family court ruling that granted divorce to a couple on the ground of impotency, the HC, however, upheld the family court order of divorce between the same couple on grounds of desertion and cruelty. Rajendra Dalal had challenged the family court’s order granting divorce to his wife Dharmishta on the ground of impotency and cruelty. It said the decree of dissolution of marriage has been passed by the family court under provisions of Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, on ground of cruelty and desertion and not under Section 12 (impotency).

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/91446/hc-cant-say-husband-impotent.html