web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Nagaraj Rao Vs Sushma Rani on 01 Oct 2020

Posted on October 7, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

Course of events in this case at High Court of Karnataka.

  1. Husband files Restitution of Conjugal Rights (RCR) and Wife makes defamatory statements in her Written Statement (WS)/Counter which she repeats in Examination. Trial Court allows RCR. Trail Court also allows Guardians and Wards Act (GWA) and allows visitation of Husband for the minor girl child. Wife shares the contents of the Counter with third parties.
  2. Husband files Defamation against Wife for sharing defamatory statements made in Counter. Trail Court allows it. 1 Month and 5000/- fine.
  3. Wife files Revision and Sessions Court dismisses it.
  4. Wife files Revision at HC to set aside the punishment given by Trial Court. HC part allows it and sets aside the punishment but enhances the fine to 15000/- to be paid within 60 days, and in default, punishment for 1 months!!!
    • Husband also files Revision at HC to enhance Punishment. Dismissed
Nagaraj Rao Vs Sushma Rani on 01 Oct 2020
Post Views: 139
Posted in High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged IPC 500 - Punishment For Defamation Nagaraj Rao Vs Sushma Rani | Leave a comment

Deepti Kapur Vs Kunal Julka on 30 June 2020

Posted on October 6, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

In this case, Single Judge discussed the admissibility of evidence in cases filed in Family Courts u/s 14 and also dispelled the false notion that if a spouse obtains an evidence illegally (by installing a CCTV in this case), such act would not be violative of the other spouse’s right to privacy. And also nothing in Constitution of India prohibits such evidence.

From Para 37,

37. While consistency in law is of utmost importance and law must get its full play regardless of the fact situation, this court must record the unease it feels with regard to a certain aspect that has arisen in this matter. Marriage is a relationship to which sanctity is still attached in our society. Merely because rules of evidence favour a liberal approach for admitting evidence in court in aid of dispensation of justice, this should not be taken as approval for everyone to adopt any illegal means to collect evidence, especially in relationships of confidence such as marriage. If the right to adduce evidence collected by surreptitious means in a marital or family relationship is available without any qualification or consequences, it could potentially create havoc in people’s personal and family lives and thereby in the society at large. For instance, if a spouse has the carte blanche to install a recording device in a bedroom or other private space or to adopt any means whatsoever to collect evidence against the partner, even if in circumstances of matrimonial discord, it would be difficult to foresee the length to which a spouse may go in doing so ; and such possibility would itself spell the end of the marital relationship. It is not uncommon for spouses to continue living together, even in matrimonial strife, for years on-end. So, while law must trump sentiment, a salutary rule of evidence or a beneficent statutory provision, must not be taken as a license for illegal collection of evidence.

Deepti Kapur Vs Kunal Julka on 30 June 2020

Citations :

Other Sources :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/170404652/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5efb8cc29fca196e33048e01

https://www.indianemployees.com/judgments/details/deepti-kapur-versus-kunal-julka

https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2020/07/01/del-hc-if-right-to-adduce-evidence-collected-by-surreptitious-means-in-a-marital-or-family-relationship-is-available-without-any-consequences-it-could-potentially-create-havoc-in-peoples-p/


Note: The nut case went to Supreme Court and the SC kicked out the SLP.

Deepti Kapur Vs Kunal Julka on 10 May 2022

Index of Divorce judgments is here.

 

Post Views: 185
Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision Affirmed by Supreme Court of India or SLP dismissed Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to Deepti Kapur Vs Kunal Julka Family Courts Act Sec 14 - Application of Indian Evidence Act 1872 HM Act Sec 13 - Divorce Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Right to Privacy | Leave a comment

Atluri Brahmanandam (D) Thr.Lrs Vs Anne Sai Bapuji on 18 Nov 2010

Posted on October 6, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

This is regarding adoption criteria under section 10() of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956, which reads as follows,

10. Persons who may be adopted.―No person shall be capable of being taken in adoption unless the following conditions are fulfilled, namely:―
(i) he or she is a Hindu;
(ii) he or she has not already been adopted;
(iii) he or she has not been married, unless there is a custom or usage applicable to the parties which permits persons who are married being taken in adoption;
(iv) he or she has not completed the age of fifteen years, unless there is a custom or usage applicable to the parties which permits persons who have completed the age of fifteen years being taken in adoption.


From Para 16,

16. The aforesaid decision is squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The Andhra Pradesh High Court has recognized such a custom among the “Kamma” community of Andhra Pradesh of taking in adoption of a person even above the age of 15 years of age and has held the same to be legal and valid.

 

Atluri Brahmanandam (D) Thr.Lrs Vs Anne Sai Bapuji on 18 Nov 2010

Citations: 2010 JT 12 4412011 AIR SC 5452010 CTC 6 5552010 SCJ 8 5992011 MLJ 1 7422011 ALT 1 312010 CLT 4 4612010 SLT 8 3982011 CUTLT SUPPL 8222010 AIOL 7842010 ALLMR SC 6 9792011 RCR CIVIL SC 2 972010 SCALE 12 1572010 SCC 14 4662010 SUPREME 7 8682012 SCC CIV 1 6442010 ALR 83 8812010 AIC 96 92011 CHN 1 217

Other Sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/663319/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609aedae4b0149711414e5d


AP High Court Order here.

Post Views: 319
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision Atluri Brahmanandam (D) Thr.Lrs Vs Anne Sai Bapuji HAM Act 10 - Persons who may be Adopted Landmark Case Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes Reportable Judgement or Order | Leave a comment

Maria Margadia Sequeria Fernandes and Ors Vs Erasmo Jack De Sequeria (D) thru LRs on 21 Mar 2012

Posted on October 6, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

Shri Dalveer Bhandari J has held so with regards to civil cases such as DVC, HMA24 etc…

42. In civil cases, adherence to Section 30 CPC would alsohelp in ascertaining the truth. It seems that this provision which ought to be frequently used is rarely pressed in serviceby our judicial officers and judges. Section 30 CPC reads as under:-
30. Power to order discovery and the like. –
Subject to such conditions and limitations as may be prescribed, the Court may, at any time either of its own motion or on the application of any party, –
(a) make such orders as may be necessary or reasonable in all matters relating to the delivery and answering of interrogatories, the admission of documents and facts, and the discovery, inspection, production, impounding and return of documents or other material objects producible as evidence;
(b) issue summons to persons whose attendance is required either to give evidence or to produce documents or such other objects as aforesaid;
(c) order any fact to be proved by affidavit

Regarding punishing perjurers:

82. This Court in a recent judgment in Ramrameshwari Devi aptly observed at p. 266, para 43 that unless wrongdoers are denied profit from frivolous litigation, it would be difficult to prevent it. In order to curb uncalled for and frivolous litigation, the courts have to ensure that there is no incentive or motive for uncalled for litigation. It is a matter of common experience that the court’s otherwise scarce time is consumed or more appropriately, wasted in a large number of uncalled for cases. In this very judgment, the Court provided that this problem can be solved or at least can be minimised if exemplary costs is imposed for instituting frivolous litigation. The Court observed at pp. 267-68, para 58 that imposition of actual, realistic or proper costs and/or ordering prosecution in appropriate cases would go a long way in controlling the tendency of introducing false pleadings and forged and fabricated documents by the litigants. Imposition of heavy costs would also control unnecessary adjournments by the parties. In appropriate cases, the courts may consider ordering prosecution otherwise it may not be possible to maintain purity and sanctity of judicial proceedings.

Maria Margadia Sequeria Fernandes and Ors Vs Erasmo Jack De Sequeria (D) thru LRs on 21 Mar 2012

Citations: [2012 SCC CIV 3 126], [2012 AIR SC 1727], [2012 AIR SC 2162], [2012 RCR CIVIL SC 2 441], [2012 SCALE 3 550], [2012 AIR BOMR 3 857], [2012 AIOL 139], [2012 SLT 2 753], [2012 JT 3 451], [2012 BOMCR SC 4 75], [2012 CCC SC 2 344], [2012 SUPREME 2 602], [2012 SCC 5 370], [2012 SCC ONLINE SC 281], [2012 ALR 92 251], [2012 LW 3 111], [2012 AIC 113 212], [2012 ALD 4 1], [2012 ALT SC 3 518], [2012 AWC SC 4 3645], [2012 CUT LT 114 437], [2012 SCSUPPL CHN 3 1]

Other Sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/100486606/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609af13e4b014971141585f

Post Views: 691
Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision Costs for Perjury CPC Order 11 - Discovery and Inspection CrPC 309 - Power to Postpone or Adjourn Proceedings Interrogatories Justice Dalveer Bhandari Maria Margadia Sequeria Fernandes and Ors Vs Erasmo Jack De Sequeria (D) thru LRs Perjury - Initiate Prosecution Perjury Under Section 340 CrPC Reportable Judgement or Order | Leave a comment

CrPC 287 – Parties may examine witnesses

Posted on October 5, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

(1) The parties to any proceeding under this Code in which a commission is issued may respectively forward any interrogatories in writing which the Court or Magistrate directing the commission may think relevant to the issue, and it shall be lawful for the Magistrate, Court or officer to whom the commission, is directed, or to whom the duty of executing it is delegated, to examine the witness upon such interrogatories.
(2) Any such party may appear before such magistrate, Court or Officer by pleader, or if not in custody, in person, and may examine, cross-examine and re-examine (as the case may be) the said witness.

Post Views: 269
Posted in Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments | Tagged CrPC 287 - Parties may examine witnesses Interrogatories | Leave a comment

MS Ram Pravesh Rai Estate (P) Ltd Vs Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Munna on 12 Jan 2016

Posted on October 5, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

Single Bench of Patna High Court held as follows, regarding interrogatories and their usage.

From Para 13,

13. Now coming to floor, it is apparent that object and purpose of serving interrogatories is to enable a party to require information from his opponent for the purpose of maintaining his own case and for destroying the case of the adversary and as such, it not only shorten the trial proceeding, save time of the court, it also deliverance the party from expenses, consumption of time as well as burden to collect and produce evidences. Side by side, it should always be guarded in a way to prevent misuse. Furthermore, as is apparent, it should be confined to the facts which are relevant to the matters in question in the suit. However, under Order-XI Rule 6, 7 the grounds have been enumerated whereupon interrogatories could be refused.
Basically, it has been settled at rest by different judicial pronouncement as:-

(i) A party is not entitled to administer interrogatories for obtaining discovery of facts which constitute exclusively the evidence of his adversary‟s case or title.
(ii) A party is not entitled to interrogate as to any confidential communications between his opponent and his legal adviser.
(iii) A party is not entitled to execute interrogatories which would involve disclosures injurious to public interest

MS Ram Pravesh Rai Estate (P) Ltd. Vs Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Munna on 12 Jan 2016

Other sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/32984899/

Post Views: 135
Posted in High Court of Patna Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to CPC Order 11 - Discovery and Inspection Interrogatories MS Ram Pravesh Rai Estate (P) Ltd Vs Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh @ Munna | Leave a comment

Sewa Singh Vs Surjit Kaur on 14 Feb 2012

Posted on October 5, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

Interrogatories are allowed in the DV cases and they are independent of Written Statement/Counter filing. Such Interrogatories have to be disposed off in 7 days from filing.

The observations made by the learned trial Judge appear to be stringent and contrary to the provisions of CPC, as in view of the amendment of CPC w.e.f. July 1, 2002, it is mandatory for a Court to decide an application forleave to deliver interrogatories within a period of seven days from the date of filing of the said application. There is no provision warranting that stay could be granted merely for non-filing of the written statement.

And then…

After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the defendant- petitioner wants to delay the filing of written statement on the pretext that an application for interrogatories under Order 11 Rule 4 CPC has been submitted before the trial Court. I have gone through the interrogatories. The interrogatories only seek to get a reply from the plaintiff- wife pertaining to an earlier application having been filed by her under the Domestic Violence Act, she being owner of properties mentioned in para Nos. 2 to 5 of the interrogatories. There is nothing mentioned in the interrogatories which could create an obstacle in fling of the written statement. Defendant- petitioner can conveniently take up a plea regarding plaintiff- respondent being owner of particular property disentitling her to any relief under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act while contesting her claim of permanent injunction. Besides this, obligation to file written statement is not subject to the adjudication of the application for interrogatories. There is an independent obligation on the part of the Court to decide the interrogatories within a period of seven days as per provisions of Order 11 Rule 2 CPC.

Sewa Singh Vs Surjit Kaur on 14 Feb 2012

Other sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/94382253/

Post Views: 247
Posted in High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged CPC Order 11 - Discovery and Inspection Interrogatories Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 Sewa Singh Vs Surjit Kaur | Leave a comment

CrPC 249 – Absence of complainant

Posted on October 5, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

When the proceedings have been instituted upon complaint, and on any day fixed for the hearing of the case, the complainant is absent, and the offence may be lawfully compounded or is  not a cognizable offence, the Magistrate may, in his discretion, notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, at any time before the charge has been framed, discharge the accused.

Post Views: 268
Posted in Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments | Tagged CrPC 249 - Absence of complainant | Leave a comment

CrPC 248 – Acquittal or conviction

Posted on October 5, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

(1) If, in any case under this Chapter in which a charge has been framed, the Magistrate finds the accused not guilty, he shall record an order of acquittal.
(2) Where, in any case under this Chapter, the Magistrate finds the accused guilty, but does not proceed in accordance with the provisions of section 325 or section 360, he shall, after hearing the accused on the question of sentence, pass sentence upon him according to law.
(3) Where, in any case under this Chapter, a previous conviction is charged under the provisions of sub-section (7) of section 211 and the accused does not admit that he has been previously convicted as alleged in the charge, the Magistrate may, after he has convicted the said accused, take evidence in respect of the alleged previous conviction, and shall record a finding thereon:
Provided that no such charge shall be read out by the Magistrate nor shall the accused be asked to plead thereto nor shall the previous conviction be referred to by the prosecution or in any evidence adduced by it, unless and until the accused has been convicted under sub-section (2).

Post Views: 266
Posted in Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments | Tagged CrPC 248 - Acquittal or conviction | Leave a comment

CrPC 258 – Power to stop proceedings in certain cases

Posted on October 4, 2020 by ShadesOfKnife

In any summons-case instituted otherwise than upon complaint, a Magistrate of the first class or, with the previous sanction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, any other Judicial Magistrate, may, for reasons to be recorded by him, stop the proceedings at any stage without pronouncing any judgment and where such stoppage of proceedings is made after the evidence of the principal witnesses has been recorded, pronounce a judgment of acquittal, and in any other case, release the accused, and such release shall have the effect of discharge.

Post Views: 195
Posted in Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments | Tagged CrPC 258 - Power to stop proceedings in certain cases | Leave a comment

Post navigation

  • Older posts
  • Newer posts

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal X Timeline

Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Follow

AP High Court Advocate with M Tech (CS) || 12 years in 'Software Industry' as Solution Architect || Blogs at https://t.co/29CB9BzK4w || #TDPTwitter

SandeepPamarati
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
swathireddytdp

Swathi Reddy

Verified account @swathireddytdp ·
1 Oct

డాక్టర్ సుధాకర్ మాస్క్ లేదు అన్నాడు అని డాక్టర్ నీ చంపారు అప్పటిలో…

ఇప్పుడు చేగొండి హరిరామ జోగయ్య కొడుకు కు బడితపూజ చేసిన దళిత బిడ్డలు

ఈరోజుల్లో కూడా ఇంత అంటరానితనమా?

తన భార్య నిలబడి ఉన్న చోటు నుండి ఆవిడను దాటి వెళ్ళాడు అని.. వెళ్ళేటప్పుడు ఆమెకు నమస్కరించలేదని, దళిత వాచ్

Reply on Twitter 2105639535820292212 Retweet on Twitter 2105639535820292212 23 Like on Twitter 2105639535820292212 103 X 2105639535820292212
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
wrestling

United World Wrestling

@wrestling ·
1 Oct

NITESH 🇮🇳 enters Greco final at Asian Games, first in 64 years for India

Reply on Twitter 2105557723857437176 Retweet on Twitter 2105557723857437176 57 Like on Twitter 2105557723857437176 345 X 2105557723857437176
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
khaidino6093

Khaidi No 6093

@khaidino6093 ·
1 Oct

YCP పుష్ప రాజ్ 🔥🔥!

డ్రైవర్ TO స్మగ్లర్ TO YCP MLA అభ్యర్థి !
#khaidino6093 #ysjagan

Reply on Twitter 2105541678748889329 Retweet on Twitter 2105541678748889329 92 Like on Twitter 2105541678748889329 348 X 2105541678748889329
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
sinister082

Shristi Singh

@sinister082 ·
30 Sep

@EricLDaugh

Reply on Twitter 2105378973089935484 Retweet on Twitter 2105378973089935484 2 Like on Twitter 2105378973089935484 12 X 2105378973089935484

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court: PF and employee share-plan deductions cannot shrink the income used to assess child maintenance September 29, 2026
  • Pradeep Ram Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr on 1 Jul 2019 September 24, 2026
  • Video Conferencing Links of District Judiciary of Andhra Pradesh September 24, 2026
  • Practical Solutions Inc Vs State of Telangana and Ors on 19 Jan 2026 September 24, 2026
  • Md. Mashood and Ors Vs State of UP and Ors on 25 Feb 2026 September 24, 2026

Most Read Posts

  • Appeal, Revision and Review Explained (2,086 views)
  • Anju Garg and Anr Vs Deepak Kumar Garg on 28 Sep 2022 - Judgement Summary (1,664 views)
  • How Courts Quash Omnibus Allegations in Matrimonial FIRs - Case Study (1,561 views)
  • Parvinder Singh Khurana Vs Enforcement of Directorate on 19 May 2026 (1,171 views)
  • Application for Exemption from Personal Appearance During Investigation – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft (1,059 views)
  • Application for Modification of Bail Conditions – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft (923 views)
  • Myth vs Reality: Bail in 498A Cases – Legal Position Explained (922 views)
  • Charul Shukla Vs State of UP and Ors on 25 Mar 2026 - Judgment Summary (899 views)
  • Exemption Application Under Section 205 CrPC – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft (878 views)
  • Ankit Saha Vs State of UP and Anr on 03 Dec 2025 (863 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (446)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (431)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (389)Landmark Case (387)1-Judge Bench Decision (376)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (302)Work-In-Progress Article (215)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (102)Sandeep Pamarati (92)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (80)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (72)Perjury Under Section 340 CrPC (71)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (62)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (47)CrPC 482 - Quash (44)CrPC 125 or BNSS 144 - Order for Maintenance of Wives Children and Parents (43)Abuse Or Misuse of Process of Court (43)HM Act Sec 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (42)Divorce Granted on Cruelty ground (42)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (767)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (329)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (190)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (167)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (112)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (95)Legal Procedure (85)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (71)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (63)LLB Study Material (59)General Study Material (56)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (54)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (53)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (48)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (47)Prakasam DV Cases (46)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (44)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (38)High Court of Telangana Judgment or Order or Notification (29)High Court of Calcutta Judgment or Order or Notification (28)

Recent Comments

  • ShadesOfKnife on How to Challenge Ex Parte Orders in Criminal and Matrimonial Proceedings – Legal Remedies
  • pradeep jain on How to Challenge Ex Parte Orders in Criminal and Matrimonial Proceedings – Legal Remedies
  • Lawyer Sonia on Regular Bail Application Format (Section 437/439 CrPC)
  • vinod gupta on Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice – Format with Legal Explanation
  • eCourts India on Compromise-Based Quashing in Matrimonial Cases – Complete Legal Strategy

Archives of SoK

  • September 2026 (13)
  • August 2026 (6)
  • July 2026 (19)
  • June 2026 (19)
  • May 2026 (24)
  • April 2026 (33)
  • March 2026 (42)
  • February 2026 (30)
  • January 2026 (21)
  • December 2025 (2)
  • November 2025 (3)
  • October 2025 (17)
  • September 2025 (12)
  • August 2025 (5)
  • July 2025 (10)
  • June 2025 (15)
  • May 2025 (3)
  • April 2025 (10)
  • March 2025 (7)
  • February 2025 (8)
  • January 2025 (1)
  • December 2024 (3)
  • November 2024 (4)
  • October 2024 (16)
  • September 2024 (15)
  • August 2024 (14)
  • July 2024 (11)
  • June 2024 (18)
  • May 2024 (13)
  • April 2024 (9)
  • March 2024 (23)
  • February 2024 (15)
  • January 2024 (11)
  • December 2023 (11)
  • November 2023 (9)
  • October 2023 (13)
  • September 2023 (12)
  • August 2023 (15)
  • July 2023 (17)
  • June 2023 (11)
  • May 2023 (6)
  • April 2023 (5)
  • March 2023 (10)
  • February 2023 (9)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (28)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (34)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (57)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (18)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (97)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Unitedmen Foundation a dedicated community forged with the mission to unite men facing legal challenges in marital disputes. 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Vinayak my2centsworth – This blog is for honest law abiding men, married or planning to get married 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS feed: Cloudflare Status Cloudflare Status

  • MAA (Chennai) on 2026-10-29 October 29, 2026
    Sep 17, 17:11 UTCScheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in MAA (Chennai) datacenter between 2026-10-29 21:00 and 2026-10-30 01:00 UTC. Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window for end-users in the affected region. For PNI / CNI customers […]
    Cloudflare Status

RSS feed: List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 2607:f8b0:4864:20::1046 | SD October 1, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 235 | First: 2020-09-21 | Last: 2026-10-01
Owned and Operated by Advocate Sandeep Pamarati and Advocate Suprajaa Rajan
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 4257 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel