Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     09 December 2011

Try biryani 2 kiss & make up is judge's new pill 4 estranged

 

Try biryani to kiss & make up

Judge’s new pill for squabbling couples

Bhopal, Nov. 23Gangacharan Dubey has served up a recipe for fellow judges complaining their plates are full of frivolous cases — try ice cream and biryani.

The Bhopal magistrate has united one estranged couple with biryani and another with ice cream, setting a novel example in resolving matrimonial disputes that he believes often stem from minor tiffs.

Dubey’s approach represents a departure from a trend in some of Madhya Pradesh’s lower courts that have had to devote precious time in recent years to cases aimed at blocking films or bothering celebrities.

In the “biryani case”, a 22-year-old woman from an upper middle-class family had sought the arrest of her husband, an air force pilot, on charges of cruelty under the domestic violence act. The couple had drifted apart within weeks of their 2009 wedding.

Dubey was chairing a lok adalat when the case came up recently. “The woman’s complaint ran into nine-and-a-half pages. She had alleged almost everything, from dowry harassment and cruelty to denial of conjugal rights. I asked her if she had read the complaint. She sounded a bit unsure and said she had signed it,” the 35-year-old first class judicial magistrate, a gold medallist in his LLB exams, said.

On probing further, Dubey found that on their wedding night, Yasser, the 24-year-old pilot, had received a call from a woman friend. Bride Ayesha objected.

On way to Bangkok for their honeymoon, he received two more calls from other women friends. The couple returned mid-way through their trip. Yasser went back to his base in Dibrugarh, Assam, while Ayesha returned to her parents in Bhopal.

Dubey realised their dispute was rather frivolous. “I just took a chance asking the girl where she had met Yasser first and what they had eaten. I then suggested to them to spend a quiet evening together. They both told me that they had eaten chicken biryani,” he said.

The couple went to Noor-us-Sabah hotel, facing Bhopal’s famous Bada Talaab and the place where they had met before marriage. A court official watched them from a distance.

The next day, the girl came back to the court, said she wanted to withdraw the case and give “another chance to their relationship”.

Dubey said a provision under Section 28 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — enacted primarily to protect women’s rights — empowered judges to set their own procedures for disposal of cases.

In the other case, lawyers of a young mother had accused her husband of harassment, misconduct and other serious offences under the same act. “When I probed the woman, I realised the two sides had come to a point of no-return over ice cream. She was extremely fond of ice cream but the husband was denying it on grounds that she was breastfeeding the child and he did not want the kid to catch cold,” Dubey, a father of two children, said.

Then came the order that broke the ice. “I told him (the husband) to take her out every evening for a week to different ice cream parlours and submit bills to the court. Seven days later, the differences were gone and complaint was withdrawn,” Dubey said.

In the most outstanding of such cases, Dubey recalled a groom who took sanyas after being told by his wife on the first night that she wanted to join police instead of marrying him.

“For some years, there was no sign of him. Later, he was traced in Mathura, in saffron robes. He told the court that he had turned a sanyasi. At this point, I asked him to get a hair-cut, sport jeans and T-shirt, and experiment with grihastha (domestic life) before opting for sanyas. I offered him a motorcycle to take the woman out. They went for a ride. It was drizzling then. Soon, they returned to say they wished to resume their domestic life on a fresh note.”

The cases, Dubey suggested, had a lesson for courts. “Why should lawyers and police be acting as home-breakers, making copious and fabricated chargesheets?

 

Why should courts and judiciary spend hours listening to such frivolous cases when far more serious cases of corruption and criminal conduct require their time and attention?” he asked.

https://telegraphindia.com/1111124/jsp/frontpage/story_14792936.jsp



Learning

 13 Replies

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     09 December 2011

 

Originally posted by :Roshni B..
" “The woman’s complaint ran into nine-and-a-half pages. She had alleged almost everything, from dowry harassment and cruelty to denial of conjugal rights. I asked her if she had read the complaint. She sounded a bit unsure and said she had signed it,” the 35-year-old first class judicial magistrate, a gold medallist in his LLB exams, said.

In the other case, lawyers of a young mother had accused her husband of harassment, misconduct and other serious offences under the same act. “When I probed the woman, I realised the two sides had come to a point of no-return over ice cream. She was extremely fond of ice cream but the husband was denying it on grounds that she was breastfeeding the child and he did not want the kid to catch cold,” Dubey, a father of two children, said.

XXXX Dubey recalled a groom who took sanyas XXXXX.

XXXX
XXXX

The cases, Dubey suggested, had a lesson for courts. “Why should lawyers and police be acting as home-breakers, making copious and fabricated chargesheets?
 
Why should courts and judiciary spend hours listening to such frivolous cases when far more serious cases of corruption and criminal conduct require their time and attention?” he asked.
"

 

Takes:-

1. There is nothing great in this media reporting (read as initiatives of one Magistrate) against the backdrop of reported media take and I quote from your own re. media posting sentence which are highlighted above....

 

 
2. When DV Act, 2005 is only made for above frivolous kind of complaint filings and feminists put pressure to have their way then what good Rules, 2006 as laid down in DV Act, 2005 come as handy as preached by this Magistrate now i.e. after it being made 6 years ago? The ans. is NO.



3. When women after filing DV Act, 2005 complaint and even after MCD are still sulk for non return of their istridhan then less said about actual nature of this so called Dream Violence Act, 2005 the better. Infact this Act, 2005 is perhaps the best dream inducer for metro wives - by metro wives - and for among metro wives only usage better than some biryani, some ice cream, some istridhan as redeemable ACR (annual conf. report) point scorer by a gold medalist Magistrate. It makes me laugh now at this gold medalist Magistrate who after almost 6 years of Gazette Notification of PWDVA, 2005 has read today that it comes with PWDVA Rules, 2006 also whereas I knew in Feb. 2005 that Ms. Indira Jaisingh’s Lawyers Collective was given the task to come up with Rules for The Act, 2005 since she was the one who brought this Act to Parliament by constant lobbying and neither the Min. of Law and Justice nor Law Commission of India were involved in making of a Law for Indian women for the first time in Indian Executives history!  I bet even my ld. brother Chandu, Advocate with 20 years experience knows this basic law making process in a democracy ha ha


4. I however salute my ld. brother advocates and such metro complainants wives for elevating status of DV Act, 2005 to that of BHARAT RATNA by talking vehemently to file DV Act on one and sundry thread posts when the query does not even require usage of such complaints but then who will institutionalize my fellow ld. brothers when good professional fees are coming easily!.

 


Does anyone have any doubt about this marvelous piece of clumsy drafted so called civil law when for serving process summon you use police force and for doing home study report by a PO yet again you use police force and even after prime facie passing interim protection order same police force is used and yet my ld. brother Chandu, Adv. calls this civil law and yet to see which civil law of the country anywhere in the world leave aside Indian jurisprudence uses three times Police Force ?/!

 


BTW (perhaps) this media reporting by ld. Snow white is the best year ending media news posting here in LCI in the name of justice and dignity.  I wonder did the three metro wives in media reporting instance ever heard of these two...... 


[keep up the media posting lady and btw
where is my Black’s Dictionary now J


lal, bal, tal n mazdoor union comments on my abv. take from all new members ID's welcome .............

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     09 December 2011

 

 

Originally posted by : Zeeshan

"

So these rules are unconstitutional????

"


1.
YES the whole Act, 2005 is unconstitutional as because of below three questions in Law making which first of all is primary duty of Executives / Legislatures before Gazette Notification of any Act / Code / Amendments thereto as the case may be and next when same is challenged under extraordinary Writ jurisdiction and or under SLP (Crl.) it becomes paramount duty of Judiciary to test The Act, 2005 whether if it passes ‘Question of Law - reasonable classification test’ under COI various Articles when brought before it with just this one single question of Law. BTW, various Writs / SLP’s till date have never placed before Judiciary this one single Question of Law as well as perennial question before Executives / Legislatures which is whether the Act 2005 in its present form was ever drafted in consultation with Ministry of Law and Justice / Law Commission of India or not?.



2.
To self test my above wordings shoot just four RTI's to know yourself; one to Min. of Law and Justice, second one to Law Commission of India and third n forth one to Lok Sabha as well as to Rajya Sabha PIO with below questions:



Que. 1:
Did Ministry of Law and Justice / Law Commission of India consulted and or involved in making of PWDVA, 2005 (The Act, 2005 in Short) and its Rules 2006 (The Rules, 2006 in Short) which was Gazette Notified as Part II, Section 3 - sub Section (iii), on 17-10-2006?



Que. 2:
Did the Bill No. 116 – C of 2005; The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Bill, 2005 (The Act) was sent to Committee on Subordinate Legislation
at Parliament of India before it was laid before Parliament members for debate?


Que. 3: Whether the Bill No. 116 – C of 2005 confirms to Rule 209 sub Rule 5 Procedures and conduct of Business of Committee of Sub-ordinate Legislation? 



If you find above four RTI with above three questions reply not to what I said under para 1 in this reply thread then do publish their exact reply and I will self delete my membership account once for ever; no further questions asked - none replied – which makes all Snow white and seven dwarfs here happiest ever - AMEN.


Now the question before us is, will you accept this challenge on how to get deleted @tajobsindia member a/c forever by placing True Copies reply to above three questions?

 



[PS.: And for God sake Chandu Advocate donot think of throwing at me Re. Dannison Paulraj and Ors. and Varsha Kapoor Judgments as I have original copy of question of law their respective lawyers put before respective HC’s as they were kind enough to send me the same for presentation before Parliament Select Committee].


(Guest)
Originally posted by :Tajobsindia
 


BTW (perhaps) this media reporting by ld. Snow white is the best year ending media news posting here in LCI in the name of justice and dignity.  I wonder did the three metro wives in media reporting instance ever heard of these two...... 



because of these TP women,part time trainee lawyers like you get to show their talent on LCI.if these women were not posting these news,u wud not have been replying.so salue them.otherwise u r simply an old,bald,uncle jee with a crooked ,broken teeth.




Ek poem yaad aayi...sunge LCI wale???:P



Chacha chachi gaye bazaar


waha se laye aloo ka achaar


chachi ne maara paad


chacha bola bara swaad





rajiv_lodha (zz)     10 December 2011

@ Tajob! Such badly drafted law, that too inacted withoutproper procedure??

Is not there any way to get it withdrawn?.............Some SLP/PIL possible?

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     12 December 2011

People have tried PIL, not once but multiple times against this act. But everytime failed.

 

 

Regards,

 

Shonee Kapoor

harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

Adv. Chandrasekhar (Advocate)     13 December 2011

I sincerely appreciate the truth told by Mr. Shonee Kapur.

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     13 December 2011

Shonee is on ego trip.

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     13 December 2011

It is not in the single act but oveall attitude, go through my earler post about Dev, Raj AND Shammi.

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     13 December 2011

Nothing is really true in this world probably the corpse in grave is the real truth all other are our peceptions and reactions.

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     15 December 2011

JSDN saw some ego trip, when it was not there.

 

Akin to my wife who saw torture when it was not there.

 

JSDN, My friend, if you have any misgivings about me, let go of it. I don't mean to impress anyone. And I am no competition to you either, you see, I am just a law student.

 

 

Regards,

 

Shonee Kapoor

harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

Shonee Kapoor (Legal Evangelist - TRIPAKSHA)     15 December 2011

Zeeshan,

 

Sushil Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India, which everyone celebrates as LEAGL TERRORISM definition of 498a. The court noted: It is well settled that more possibility of abuse of a provision of law does not per se invalidate a legislation. It must be presumed, unless contrary is proved, that administration and application of a particular law would be done "not with an evil eye and unequal hand"

 

Regards,

 

Shonee Kapoor

harassed.by.498a@gmail.com

1 Like

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     15 December 2011

 

Originally posted by :Shonee Kapoor
" JSDN, My friend, if you have any misgivings about me, let go of it. I don't mean to impress anyone. And I am no competition to you either, you see, I am just a law student.  

 

Hats off to dear brother Shonee for replying with so much humility to those who hold grudges....I wish more and more people become like him.Then the world will become such a peaceful place...

DEFENSE ADVOCATE.-firmaction@g (POWER OF DEFENSE IS IMMENSE )     15 December 2011

I have no misgiving against any body but I give contrary opinion which may not be palatable but bitter truth.

I gave contrast of Dev saheb and Shammi kapoor just  make analysis coolly.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register