Dalip Singh Vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 3 December, 2009

Posted on May 21, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

The Supreme Court bench has delivered this landmark judgment calling out the cherished two basic values of life i.e., `Satya’ (truth) and `Ahimsa’ (non-violence) in Indian Society and exclaimed that,

“In last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not have any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals. In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have, from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final.“

Other Sources :

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198000498/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5609aed8e4b0149711414dd7

Citations: [2010 SCC CRI 1 324], [2010 SCC 2 114], [2009 SCALE 14 473], [2010 AIC 85 13], [2010 AIR SC SUPP 116], [2010 AIR SC 0 50], [2010 SCJ 1 863], [2009 JT 15 201], [2009 SLT 9 167], [2009 AIOL 1294], [2009 SUPREME 8 485], [2010 ALL LJ 1 536], [2010 MADLJ 2 483], [2010 AIR SCW 50]

Index of perjury case laws here.

Post Views: 886

Boddu Anjali and Anr Vs Boddu Annapoornamma and Ors on 17 June, 2015

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

A very good point available in this judgment from the JMFC. Ongole, for those who are facing Domestic Violence case as well as IPC 498A wherein the allegations are same in both.

When the husband of a knife dies, maintenance of the daughter-in-law falls are the parents-in-law as long as she is alive. There is no requirement of law that a grandfather is under an obligation to maintain his grand child when the mother of said child is alive.

Boddu Anjali Vs Boddu Annapoornamma on 17 June, 2015

Index of PWDV Act cases here.

Post Views: 318

Hemlataben Maheshbhai Chauhan Vs State of Gujarat on 21 October, 2010

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

In this Gujarat High Court order, Judge denied interim maintenance to Knife in DVC as she was already getting maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC.

Hemlataben Maheshbhai Chauhan Vs State of Gujarat on 21 October, 2010

Citations:

Other sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/802854/

Index of DV Judgments is here.

Post Views: 374

XXX Vs YYY on 27 Jul 2017

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This Maintenance order, under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, is modified ‘from the date of order’ to ‘from date of application’ by Karnataka High Court, thereby enormously enhancing the overall interim maintenance to be paid by husband.

XXX-Vs-YYY-on-27-Jul-2017-Parties-names-addresses-redacted

Index of Maintenance Orders under Hindu Marriage Act are here.

Note: Name and Address of the Petitioner and her family members are redacted upon her request emails dt: 05 Jul 2023 and 25 Apr 2025.

Also received another email Dt: 22-Jul-2025 from the Petitioner, annexed with two Orders from Karnataka High Court (in WP 15781 of 2024), which is mentioned here for transparency sake. These Orders were duly complied on 24-Jul-2025

Post Views: 606

IPC 354 – Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

354. Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty.

—Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

IPC 354A here.

Post Views: 114

IPC 209 – Dishonestly making false claim in Court

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

209. Dishonestly making false claim in Court.

—Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly, or with intent to injure or annoy any person, makes in a Court of Justice any claim which he knows to be false, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Post Views: 515

Subrata Roy Sahara Vs Union of India & Ors on 6 May, 2014

Posted on May 20, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Hon’ble Supreme Court has shown it’s disgust toward frivolous litigants in this case.

Relevant portions of the said judgment are as under:

“191. The Indian judicial system is grossly afflicted, with frivolous litigation. Ways and means need to be evolved, to deter litigants from their compulsive obsession, towards senseless and ill-considered claims. One needs to keep in mind, that in the process of litigation, there is an innocent sufferer on the other side, of every irresponsible and senseless claim. He suffers long drawn anxious periods of nervousness and restlessness, whilst the litigation is pending, without any fault on his part. He pays for the litigation, from out of his savings (or out of his borrowings), worrying that the other side may trick him into defeat, for no fault of his. He spends invaluable time briefing counsel and preparing them for his claim. Time which he should have spent at work, or with his family, is lost, for no fault of his. Should a litigant not be compensated for, what he has lost, for no fault?…”

Subrata Roy Sahara Vs Union of India & Ors on 6 May, 2014

Post Views: 94

HS Bedi Vs National Highway Authority Of India on 22 January, 2016

Posted on May 19, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is a wonderful judgment from Justice J R Midha explaining in detail and elaborate what is an offence under Section 209 IPC and how to get the offender punished.

HS Bedi Vs National Highway Authority Of India on 22 January, 2016

Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in

Post Views: 252

Sulochana Vs Thiru. R.Sivasamy on Pronounced on 24 May, 2017

Posted on May 19, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

The procedure to file a perjury case is detailed in this nice judgment from Madras High Court.

Sulochana vs Thiru. R.Sivasamy on Pronounced on 24 May, 2017

Post Views: 532

Chandra Kanjappa Kuchchikurwe Vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr. on 14 December, 2012

Posted on May 19, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

Wonderful point:

Since the offences, with which the applicant is charged, are bailable, the anticipatory bail application is not maintainable

Read Paras 5-10

Even though Section 324 IPC is made non-bailable via Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act of 2005, (Act No.25 of 2005), but it was NOT appointed into force, by a notification in the Official Gazette by Central Government.

Chandra Kanjappa Vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr. on 14 December, 2012

Post Views: 201

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Dalip Singh Vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 3 December, 2009

Boddu Anjali and Anr Vs Boddu Annapoornamma and Ors on 17 June, 2015

Hemlataben Maheshbhai Chauhan Vs State of Gujarat on 21 October, 2010

XXX Vs YYY on 27 Jul 2017

IPC 354 – Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty

IPC 209 – Dishonestly making false claim in Court

Subrata Roy Sahara Vs Union of India & Ors on 6 May, 2014

HS Bedi Vs National Highway Authority Of India on 22 January, 2016

Sulochana Vs Thiru. R.Sivasamy on Pronounced on 24 May, 2017

Chandra Kanjappa Kuchchikurwe Vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr. on 14 December, 2012