second-divorce-petition-maintainable

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/second-divorce-petition-maintainable-143647

Now No Arrests for Admin.. WhatsApp admin not at risk - No arrests under Sec 66-A for social media posts, rules SC

Now No Arrests for Admin.. WhatsApp admin not at risk - No arrests under Sec 66-A for social media posts, rules SC http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/no-arrests-under-sec-66-a-for-social-media-posts-rules-sc/57893.html

The Supreme Court struck down Section 66-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, on Tuesday.

Pronouncing their verdict on a PIL filed against the section in a packed courtroom, which empowers the police to arrest a person for allegedly posting ‘offensive materials' on social networking sites, a Bench of Justices J Chelameswar and RF Nariman said the section violated the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression and was therefore was illegal.

Terming liberty of thought and expression as "cardinal", the Bench said: “The public's right to know is directly affected by Section 66-A of the Information Technology Act."

"Section 66-A of the IT Act is struck down in its entirety," said the apex court bench of Justice J. Chelameswar and Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman.

"Our Constitution provides for liberty of thought, expression and belief. In a democracy, these values have to be provided within constitutional scheme," said Justice Nariman, pronouncing the verdict.

"There is no nexus between public order and discussion or causing annoyance by dissemination of information. Curbs under Section 66A of the IT Act infringes on the public right to know."

Calling the written word of the provision, which comprises terms such as ‘"annoying", "inconvenient" and "grossly offensive", vague, the apex court said: “What may be offensive to a person, may not be offensive to others".

The assurance given by one government was not binding on its successor, the Bench said. "Governments come and go but Section 66-A will remain forever," the bench said.

The SC, however, refused to strike down two other provisions of the IT Act that provide blocking of websites.

.https://www.tribuneindia.com/mobi/news/nation/no-arrests-under-sec-66-a-for-social-media-posts-rules-sc/57893.html

Wife granted opportunity to prove additional documents not available during trial for maintenance under S. 125 CrPC*

🌟🌟🌟
*Wife granted opportunity to prove additional documents not available during trial for maintenance under S. 125 CrPC*

*Delhi High Court:* Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. disposed of a petition filed in a matrimonial dispute by allowing the petitioner (wife) to prove additional documents in the matter of an application seeking maintenance from the respondent (husband) under Section 125 CrPC.

Earlier, the trial court had dismissed the wife’s application on the ground that she was not able to establish that she withdrew from the society of her husband for a reasonable cause. The trial court noticed that no evidence was placed on record to substantiate the allegations of cruelty against the husband made by the wife.

R.K. Narang, Advocate for the wife prayed to prove copies of several complaints made to various authorities and also medical records showing injuries caused by the husband. It was submitted that these documents, which were not available with the wife during the trial, had now been obtained from the authorities concerned. Per contra, Akhilesh Kr Singh, Advocate appearing for the husband submitted that the complaints were false and frivolous.

Keeping in view the entirety of the case, the High Court set aside the impugned judgment of the trial court. The wife was granted an opportunity to file and prove the additional documents before the trial court. She was also permitted to summon the record from the authorities where original of such documents may be available. As, consequently, trial court’s order fixing interim maintenance stood received. [Beena Kumari v. Manoj Kumar, CRL. RP No. 50 of 2019, dated 21-02-2019]
✨✨✨

If, on refusal of marriage, any girl or boy commits suicide, it will generate huge number of litigations of offence punishable under Section 306

"If, on refusal of marriage, any girl or boy commits suicide, it will generate huge number of litigations of offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code."

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/mere-refusal-to-marry-is-not-instigation-to-commit-suicide-hc-chhattisgarh-143376

surrogate-mother-is-also-entitled-to-maternity-leave-delhi-high-court

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/www.livelaw.in/amp/surrogate-mother-is-also-entitled-to-maternity-leave-delhi-high-court/

Wife Entitled To 'Residence Order' Only If She Establishes Domestic Violence: SC

Wife Entitled To 'Residence Order' Only If She Establishes Domestic Violence: SC [Read Order] https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/residence-order-only-if-domestic-violence-established-142495\

Whether unemployed husband is bound to pay maintenance to earning wife?

Whether unemployed husband is bound to pay maintenance to earning wife?

In this context, we may profitably quote a passage from the
judgment rendered by the High Court of Delhi in Chander Prakash
Bodhraj v. Shila Rani Chander Prakash [AIR 1968 Delhi 174]
wherein it has been opined thus:-
“An able-bodied young man has to be presumed to be
capable of earning sufficient money so as to be able
reasonably to maintain his wife and child and he cannot be
heard to say that he is not in a position to earn enough to be
able to maintain them according to the family standard. It is
for such able-bodies person to show to the Court cogent
grounds for holding that he is unable to reasons beyond his
control, to earn enough to discharge his legal obligation of
maintaining his wife and child. When the husband does not
disclose to the Court the exact amount of his income, the
presumption will be easily permissible against him.”
22. From the aforesaid enunciation of law, it is absolutely
clear that once the husband is an able-bodied young man capable of
earning sufficient money, he cannot simply deny his legal obligation
of maintaining his wife.

23. It has to be remembered that when the woman leaves
the matrimonial home, the situation is quite different. She is deprived
of many a comfort. Sometimes the faith in life reduces. Sometimes,
she feels she has lost the tenderest friend. There may be a feeling
that her fearless courage has brought her misfortune. At this stage,
the only comfort that the law can impose is that the husband is
bound to give monetary comfort. That is the only soothing legal balm
for which she cannot be allowed to resign to destiny. Therefore, the
lawful imposition for grant of maintenance allowance. [ Ref: Shamima
Farooqui vs. Shahid Khan (supra)].
24. The learned counsel for the husband has vehemently
argued that the learned courts below have ignored the fact that the
wife is earning Rs.9,000/- by taking her income only to be Rs.5000/-.
I am afraid that such contention is belied from the records as the
learned appellate court has duly taken into consideration the fact that
the wife was getting a salary of Rs.9,000/-.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No.26 of 2015 and Cr.
Revision No. 369 of 2014.

Date of decision: 1.6.2015.

Vipul Lakhanpal …… Petitioner.
Vs.
Smt. Pooja Sharma ….. Respondent

Coram
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.

Citation; 2015 CRLJ 3451HP