Consensual sex during pendency of application u/s 13-b hma.

Since the statutory period u/s 28HMA, for preferring appeal against divorce is expired, can the same be done under article 226/227 before the High Court ,

 --- It has to be 90 Days to prefer appeal as per HC.

if so the grounds of fraud will be admissible or not ?

---- It cannot be termed as Fraud as Both parties are Adults, more it can be inducment.

Can the complaint u/s 376, 418, 406 & 506 IPC are feasible?

----- Again, Both parties are Adults, and Consent cannot be termed as Rape.

In the divorce petition both the petitioners have wrongly stated on oath with regards to the one year separation clause, will the offences under 191 & 193 IPC perjury attract?  

---- Yes, Very Much...

How can the decree for dissolution of marriage be challenged, as the ld Family Court has not completely followed the process and neither has made any attempt of reconciliation between the parties.   

--- Both parties has stated on Oath, so question of Family Court process does not arise.

Instead wasting more time, Both should part ways,as Divorce is already Granted.

Both the parties are responsinle and should be well aware of repurcussinons.

 

Well Mr. Zoheb, 

Indeed thanks for enlighting, Cant the fraud or misconception of facts be said when the said pretext is on the false promises of marriage is present ? 

Regards

Originally posted by : Vikas Jain
	Dear Sir/s, Is it possible to pursue the Police to register an offence u/s 376 IPC, when the consensual s*x on numerous occasion occurred between husband and wife, during the pendency of MCD u/s 13-B of HMA. The chronological sequence of the said case is as below:- 1.     Marriage solemnized on 07-07-2014, stayed together till 11-12-2014. 2.     Application of MCD u/s 13 B filed before Family Court No 03 on 29-12-2015 adjudicated vide HMP No. 2262/2015 3.     During Second Motion the affidavit in chief was filed by both the petitioners on 30-06-2016 vide Exh: 09 & 10. 4.     Divorce decree pronounced on 16-07-2016. 5.     The amount of Rs 5.5 Lacs agreed to pay by Petitioner No.1 Husband towards permanent alimony was transferred on 11-08-2016, and later on 08-09-2016 the petitioner No 2 wife had reversed the amount of Rs 5 Lac in the account of Husband. Here the wife was constantly and consistently given an impression that the application would be withdrawn, and she would be accepted back to her matrimonial house. This misrepresentation was done by the husband by calling her every day, over phone for hours and making her false promises to reunite, the couple had even visited abroad, and many tourist locations. However the malafide intentions of the husband behind doing so was to ensure that the wife does not withdraw her consent and cooperate till the process of 13-B was concluded. The day after the divorce decree was announced and awarded the husband has estranged her, not ready even to talk to her. The wife in this case was ready to co-habitat with him during the course of trial; however after considering the attitude of the husband who has destitute her so badly, she is now willing to appeal the said decree of divorce dtd 16-07-2016 and prevent the husband here from remarrying.     My queries: Since the statutory period u/s 28HMA, for preferring appeal against divorce is expired, can the same be done under article 226/227 before the High Court , if so the grounds of fraud will be admissible or not ? Can the complaint u/s 376, 418, 406 & 506 IPC are feasible? In the divorce petition both the petitioners have wrongly stated on oath with regards to the one year separation clause, will the offences under 191 & 193 IPC perjury attract?   How can the decree for dissolution of marriage be challenged, as the ld Family Court has not completely followed the process and neither has made any attempt of reconciliation between the parties.    With regards

The entire case appears to be a afterthoughts afterthought.

You erred and kept erring again and again, and you still want to go for appeal in High Court?

You will be directly admitting of wrongdoing and lying under oath for which court will directly take cognizance and send you both to jail.

Case 1, wife filing blah blah cases-à husband losing 15 years of his life running behind court cases.

Case 2, husband agreeing to pay one time alimony --à keeping in mind that he will lose 15 years and still plays around (supposedly to get away with getting easy divorce and also getting the money back.).

Case 3, wife roaming with husband (supposedly believing husband and his tales or rejoining him and finally coming to know that husband took her for a ride).

Case 4, wife feels cheated as she had hopes of re-joining husband (even after filing a dozen cases on him, on what basis did she even think husband will take her back after she files all these cases or even believe when he told he will accept her back?).

Story too good to be true?

What you need to understand is, if both pursued this matter, case 1---- husband would lose 15 years.

Case 4----- wife will lose 10 years.  End outcome, nobody will be peaceful.

If you pursue this matter to high court, it will be even shameful to discuss such further.

As you both are divorced now, simply move on.  Next time don’t repeat same mistake.

Dear Sir,

I appreciate your view on the said matter, however would like to clarify few things which were purely based on assumations by you. 

1. Neither I had mentioned nor in the instance case the wife has ever filed any single case on the miscreant husband. It was an love marriage, the entire episode originated on a small quarrel which contiuned and became aggresive once when the husband was scolded (not manhandled) by the parents & relatives of the wife.

2. If the husband was really desparate and inclined to get the divorce easily , he would have never taken the given alimony back from the wife. 

3. Wife kept on roaming and maitained the relation only because of the false pretext of reuniting, also there were numerous incidents where the wife requested the Advocate to help her in attempt of reconciliation. 

None of the things mentioned in the query are either afterthoughts nor this is a story, which should be given the benefir of doubt, infact such incidents are the lessons which proffessional lawyers are ought to be alert , while appearing their females clients to caution on maintaining the distance after the MCD is filed. 

The police complaint is already been received by Police yesterday, I am morefully hopeful on getting the offence registered u/s 376 IPC. 

Thank you for responding on the query. 

With Regards

Vikas Jain

Advocate

Originally posted by : Vikas Jain
	Dear Sir, I appreciate your view on the said matter, however would like to clarify few things which were purely based on assumations by you.  1. Neither I had mentioned nor in the instance case the wife has ever filed any single case on the miscreant husband. It was an love marriage, the entire episode originated on a small quarrel which contiuned and became aggresive once when the husband was scolded (not manhandled) by the parents & relatives of the wife. 2. If the husband was really desparate and inclined to get the divorce easily , he would have never taken the given alimony back from the wife.  3. Wife kept on roaming and maitained the relation only because of the false pretext of reuniting, also there were numerous incidents where the wife requested the Advocate to help her in attempt of reconciliation.  None of the things mentioned in the query are either afterthoughts nor this is a story, which should be given the benefir of doubt, infact such incidents are the lessons which proffessional lawyers are ought to be alert , while appearing their females clients to caution on maintaining the distance after the MCD is filed.  The police complaint is already been received by Police yesterday, I am morefully hopeful on getting the offence registered u/s 376 IPC.  Thank you for responding on the query.  With Regards Vikas Jain Advocate

Sir,

376 wont stand in this case, there are lot of lose ends which cant be tied together.

However, you can get case registered under 376 as there have been lot of ammendments after 2013. 

I hope you will be in touch to let us know about developments in the case.