Singapore-based NRI summoned in bigamy case

now whose rights shud the feminists focus upon?

the rightful legal wife or the "respectable lady"?

i am talking of the situation,where the respectable informal lady is v.much aware of the man being married,yet married him.

and the feminists are wasting time of courts fighting for "rights" and "naamkaran" of these wrongful women while they shud be concentrating their energies on more imp. issues.

now whose rights shud the feminists focus upon? the rightful legal wife or the "respectable lady"?

that is the million doller question before the faminist. both are female, for whom they will fight? or they are already splited up.
 

however the second solemnization of marriage to be proved beyond reasonable doubt.

its v.well given in the report that the 2nd marriage was solemnized,which is invalid lawfully.

dats why so much hungama.

according to news report, 2nd marriage solemnized.

let the accused submit his side, thereafter the matter will be cleared.

ok..let the man submit his side of the story.

meanwhiel arup ji,read these lines again,as given in the report:

Court of judicial magistrate Anupamish Modi stated that after considering the preliminary evidence, there was no ground to disbelieve the statements of complainant and the witnesses she presented. Consequently, Arora was summoned.

arup jee,the complaint was made in 2008,he was booked in 2009,and this news came this year only,after the magistrate was satisfied that bigamy has happened...so enuf investigation was already dun..

what is the preliminary evidence here?

Yes, without getting divorce from first wife, second marriage is void. And is also punishiable u/s. 494 & 495 of IPC. .Second marriage will be void but the government or the police will not do anything and put the charges of bigamy until the first wife puts the charges. IPC Sec 494. Marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife..

A case that happened recentlythat is Sania Mirza’s cricketing fiance Shoaib Malik appears to be in a double-whammy dock. First, Shoaib is facing ban for his disappointing role and performance in the recent Australian tour. Second, news has emerged that Ayesha Siddiqui, who claims to be Shoaib Malik’s first wife has thrown a bouncer at the dashing Pakistani former cricket captain.

Ayesha’s father, Mohammed Ahmed Siddiqui has threatened to sue Shoaib if he does not divorce his daughter. “I want divorce for my daughter. According to Islamic law, my daughter cannot remarry if she doesn’t have the divorce paper,” he said in an interview to an Indian news channel. He also said that Sania Mirza will be Shoaib’s second wife.

The Siddiqui family is said to be in a state of shock over the reports of Shoaib and Sania marriage in April.

thanks kushan

one more info is there.that the wife can file sec. 120 B(criminal conspiracy) even against the second so called wife or "repectable honourable pampered by feminists lady" even though it was thot that no action can be taken against the other woman.

 just as the owner & his family only have the right to his property while any1 else trying to enter that area will be charged of tresspass...same way only the wife has the right to the husband's body and vice versa.any1 else trying to establish rights over the spouse shud also be punished.

the adulterous partner too can be punished depending on whether the wife wants to continue her marriage or not.

hopefully such laws get passed where a wife can also get a respectable cocubine deviji punished when she deliberately lives with a married man,even without bigamy.....this is possible when feminists focus their energies on such things instead of cuddling and pampering home breakers.

sania's case diffrent.

might be enough investigation already done, but all these are from wife's side.

what the other side telling not yet clear.

as the male is executive, hope that concerned rule known to him.

no action can be taken against the other woman.

- IT IS WRONG. IF THE CHARGE PROVED ALL THE ACCUSED MAY FACE TRIAL AND PUNISHMENT.

same way only the wife has the right to the husband's body and vice versa

- WRONG CONCEPTION. BODY AND MIND IS ONE'S OWN.

CAN NOT BE ENCROACHED BY THE OTHER PARTY.

this is possible when feminists focus their energies on such things instead of cuddling and pampering home breakers.

- ALREADY TOLD IN YOUR OTHER THREAD THAT THESE LADIES ( ACCORDING TO YOUR VIEW - KEPT) ARE NOT HOME BREAKER BUT IN REALITY HOME MAKER. THEY GIVE SHELTER A MAN IN DISTRESS.

if body and mind are one's own,why does a person marry?he can live like a saint without sharing his body and mind..

wots the guarantee that the devijis will be v.good to the man in a live in relation,esp. when sense of committment is lacking?dint u read my thread the other day that a woman faking as a divorcee lived with a married man,robbed him and ran away.

if the other woman was so nice to her partner,live in relations in india wud have been more popular than marriage and people wud have been able to spend their entire life wid one deviji only...if the devijis & devtas ( adulterous men) are so devoted,then why the concept of maintenance and alimony was introduced in DV act for devijis?

becaue they also got ditched by their live in partners....

if everything is so rosy abt live in relations,then the concept of alimony for them shud not have arised in the 1st place,as it's only given for abandoned and harassed women..

@Roshni B

You said that “If body and mind are one's own,why does a person marry?he can live like a saint without sharing his body and mind..”

This statement is totally wrong.

BODY AND MIND IS ONE'S OWN.

CAN NOT BE ENCROACHED BY THE OTHER PARTY.

I know the exact meaning that arupji had said earlier.I dont explains in this forum at this time.

Your remaining statement is true.