By saying judicial process oppression tried to be availed by litigants alone cannot answer the whole question as every judgement is based upon some device of some contractual system , but if you misuse the very contracting system you obviously do not address reasonably rightly as every citizen is some kind of clever guy to see how to misuse your legal system based on very incorrigible statutes.....
One dolly says in a request for experts advice says that she is manipulated by her husband to sign a mutual consent divorce, obviously the very divorce laws is basically flawed , that is being misused by husband or wife , who is the culprit , basically law makers are the worst culprit, ' a sparrow cannot make a summer' is it not?
today legal process is in itself from law making process is seriously flawed.
So I have to say , see Mr Karnan used the Atrocities Act irrelevantly when he was not honored by his brother judges, then he went ahead with all kinds of corruption allegations on judges of the SC , obviously he misused the instrument of PCA 1981 on judges without any iota proof, obviously he misused the judicial process lying in his hands as a judge of a high court, besides he a meaningless inherent power in high court as if available to him though he was suspended from judicial work by the very SC, he had the temerity to punish the 7 judges of the seven judges bench of the SC ,obviously is a misuse of judicial process as an instrument of oppression just he attempted , obviously it shows how law makers made statutes that fall into series of conflict of laws that it itself is serious oppression of law making process of the parliament or the legislatures, when so what inherent power can meaningfully work u/s 482 is agan a serious question before us that need to be a critical criminal laws research based stidy, i may soon address by an article soon. tks
No one can define what is a Law is, said several supreme courts world over , fact is using judicial process as an oppression instrument just due to irrelevant statutes and amendments by law makes just make law making most cumbersome process besides no statute ever served as a common instrument except IPC provisions sans amendments worked. so..
Dear Expert, thank you very much indeed for the article, especially quoting my favorite famous lines of Judge Cardazo, The Judge, even when he is free...............! I would add that Judicial process is not only a solemn act, but a social engineering. To me, Law is not only social engineering, but a spiritual process in action in real life.
while agreeing with you, i say Mullahs in fact not correct interpreters of Islam but eminent scholar only, besides scholars too make mistakes so after standing tests of comments the scholars' view,under test if all commentators are satisfied then scholar's view is accepted, that way Hindu Upanishads stay out - here that kind of test doesn't exit, so scholars' views face issues of interpretational issues, interpreting religious views is not that easy so one needs courts of justice - in some countries , there are Ecclessiastical Courts recognized , but in India there is No such recognized courts like Ecclessiastivcal courts, so jurisdiction is vested in the SCI or in HVs but high court decisions are subject to SCI scrutiny on the issue of principle of laws - besides in india Adt 368 clearly fetters parliament to interfere with individual rights called fundamental rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution - that way CJI Khehar rightly said after muslim marriage ought to be registered under spl marriages Act is right approach - besides India being secular there is obvious gender equality - no contract can be one sided, if one sided contracts are there they are obviously fail the test of contract under breach of contract, causing serious liquidated exemplary damages one has to face under Law of Torts... i am writing a detailed article that will be posted on face book under 'Free lance writers' that ois read all over the world any interested can see in my fb account sir.. tks
why Judicial dispensation is great - see in thee triple talaq case will follow
why i have explained down below 'Among Hindus there is no caste system since time immemorial but today's castes are based on division of work as is elsewhere that is all; but giving castes some validity other than work based division , it is obvious we mislead - see , Marriage means two genders (male and female) are to be good friends all through their life is the very principle of 'Saptapadfii' (seven steps) - see a telugu movie 'Saptapadi, to better understand - in that film a brahmin girl loves a low caste man by division of labor only, then her father finally hands her in marriage to that boat man and when the people of the village object the father of the girl quotes scriptures where it is confirmed any one can marry any one if they can be very good friends (aathmeyadu) - it means what ever contract we may call in any religion it obviously mean to assure real great friends only, nothing more and nothing less - so there shall not be break at all as both are life long friends only - in Pandian age - Avvaiyar's parents were - father called Bhagvan - was an orthodox brahmin and his wife was from a 'Adhidravida' woman - both lived together harmoniously and had 7 great children - so Kapil sibal's idea of comparing 'belief' of thalaq is untenable as Islam was the last formed , obviously it ought to have all civilized ideals, its ideals s more stated in Quran that is authentic more than Hadith - even Islam also recognised this fact by Saudi Arabia - birth place of Islam where we have 'Kabhala''..
fundamental rights do guarantee of individual rights so 'None need to wear Masks' but 'Be what you are' - that is true to one self not to live under fear or other forces, but by conscience if one understands 'Psychology' of humans - why humans asman by necessity ought to be Human not irrational under fades of some unreliable beliefs - so the idea of 'Ram JanmaBhoomi' is invalid thought, though projected as authentic by BJP and RSS men - so quoting Ram and Ayodhya has no relevance at all, is absolutely obvious;
Further Art 368 thus in the constitution of India never allows any Parliament to interfere with any of the fundamental rights brought under Part III of the indian constitution - so arguments ' govt bringing some statute is irrelevant against one's individual fundamental rights - so too the Muslim bd too cannot interfere with one's fundamental rights to be human besides it is also eclipsing the Bd's authority to interfere the fundamental rights of both man and woman muslim (islam is just a faith but bound by Qoran only to continue as a Muslim) , one need not be controlled by this so called Bd of Mullsah(s) - obviously they reflect some inhuman ideas so they have no relevance in a secular India which is governed by the Secular constitution of India - very word secular means 'no reflection of religion or castes as perceived by any civilised advanced society only - so obviously irrelevant ideas floated are just ultra vires the Indian constitution's basic tenets is my opinion
You need to be
logged in to post comment
You can also submit your article by sending to email@example.com
view more »
Our Network Sites
Join LAWyersclubindia.com and Share your Knowledge. Registered members get a chance to interact at Forum, Ask Query, Comment etc.