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

Category: Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit)

Gender biased Laws enacted in India under the Guise of Article 15(3) of Constitution of India

Posted on September 2, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

The following are the complete list of gender-biased Laws (and many provisions in both Substantial and Procedural Laws) enacted in India under the guise of Article 15(3) of Constitution of India and some being continued those that were enacted even before the effective date of Constitution and even more before the Independence of India.

The thing to note is that, there are no comparable laws made to protect men and boys

Substantial and Procedural Laws of India

From Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Amended from time to time)

  1. 304B – Dowry Death
  2. 354 – Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty
  3. 354A – Sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment
  4. 354B – Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe
  5. 354C – Voyeurism
  6. 354D – Stalking
  7. 354E – Sextortion
  8. 375 – Rape
  9. 376 – Punishment for rape
  10. 376A – Punishment for causing death or resulting in persistent vegetative state of victim
  11. 376AB – Punishment for rape on woman under twelve years of age
  12. 376B – Sexual intercourse by husband upon his wife during separation
  13. 376C – Sexual intercourse by a person in authority
  14. 376D – Gang rape
  15. 376DA – Punishment for gang rape on woman under sixteen years of age
  16. 376DB – Punishment for gang rape on woman under twelve years of age
  17. 376E -Punishment for repeat offenders
  18. 493 – Cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful marriage
  19. 497 – Adultery (– Got Struck down by Supreme Court)
  20. 498 – Enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman
  21. 498A – Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty
  22. 509 – Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman

From Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Amended from time to time)

  1. 125 – Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents
  2. 198 – Prosecution for offences against marriage
  3. 198A – Prosecution of offences under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code
  4. 198B – Cognizance of offence

From Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Amended from time to time)

  1. 112 – Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy

Gender-biased Laws

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

  1. Act
  2. Rules

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention Prohibition and Redressal) Act 2013

  1. Act
  2. Rules

National Commission for Women, 1990

  1. Act
  2. Rules

Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956

  1. Act
  2. Rules
  3. Section 20

Juvenile Justice Act, 2015

  1. Act along with Amendment made in 2021
  2. Rules

Some of the goals I set for myself here, include targeting some of the above discreetly.

Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged Gender-biased Laws Summary Post Work-In-Progress Article

CrPC 125 Must Go From Statute Book. The Prayer

Posted on May 25, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

The prayers section should give anyone interested in this PIL, a fair understanding on the attack vector. The detailed analysis is available here. The Thought journey began here.


 

  1. Strike down/amend/alter appropriately and sufficiently, the set of Sections 125 to 128 of Code of Criminal Procedure so as to be made applicable to divorced women only, as they are the only class of citizens, who are not covered by the later special enactments in DV Act 2005 and Senior Citizens 2007.

Only the divorced women should be allowed to file for maintenance under Section 125(1) Cr.P.C. along with a copy of the divorce decree. All other classes of citizens those that are in married, widowed, marriage-like relationships, children (both legitimate and illegitimate), parents (senior citizens, adoptive parents, step parents should be barred to file for maintenance under Section 125(1) Cr.P.C. as they are covered by the later special enactments in Section 20(1)(d) of DV Act 2005 and Senior Citizens 2007. Allowing them multiple/ dual reliefs via special laws over and above general law, under same set of facts/allegations against same respondents, is nothing but legally allowing/approving to lead to Res Judicita and this Honorable Court has sufficient power and duty to do the substantial equity and justice.

 

  1. Strike down/amend/alter appropriately and sufficiently, the following provisions of 20(1)(d) of DV Act 2005, so as to remove the violative words/phrases – “including an order under or in addition to an order of maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)”. This follows from the prayer #1 above and is in consequence to the same and helps to strike down the malice/violation of fundamental rights of Senior Citizens, caused by these words/phrases.

 

  1. Strike down/amend/alter appropriately and sufficiently, the Senior Citizens Act 2007 so as to remove the violative words/phrases caused by the malice/violation of fundamental rights of Senior Citizens, caused by this words/phrases.
    1. Section 9(2), hard Ceiling of Maximum monthly maintenance of only Rs.10,000/- in cash can be granted by RDO who is Maintenance Officer.
    2. Per Section 5(4), Statutory limit imposed on time taken to dispose of the case, which is 90 days.
      1. This has to be 30 days as in other maintenance laws.
    3. Per Section 16(1), Any senior citizen or a parent, as the case may be, aggrieved by an order of a
      Tribunal may, within sixty days from the date of the order, prefer an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal
      Provided further that the Appellate Tribunal may, entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of sixty days, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal in time.
      1. This has to be 30 days as in other maintenance laws.

 

  1. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to all the Trial and Family Courts in India, adjudicating cases under all these three enactments, in every such case, where the Complainant seeks interim relief of maintenance allowance, invoke the time limit for case disposal available in the statute, mandatorily.

E.g.:

  1. a) For every application filed under Sec 125(1)(d) of Cr.P.C, invoking second proviso seeking interim relief of maintenance, mandatory invocation of invoking third proviso under Sec 125(1)(d) of Cr.P.C, disposing of the interim maintenance case in 60 days, should be a must.
  2. b) For every application filed under Sec 23 of DV Act 2005 seeking interim relief of maintenance, mandatory invocation of Sec 12(5) disposing of the main DV application under Sec 12(1) in 60 days, should be a must.

 

This effectively caters to the needs of the genuine victims with timely relief and hampers the mischief played by fraudulent complainants. They cannot seek one relief of Interim maintenance and not seek another relief of disposal in 60 days. This has to be viewed with an eye of suspicion.

 

  1. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to all the Trial and Family Courts in India, adjudicating cases under Section 125 Cr.P.C. enactments, to convert/transfer every such case filed by a non-divorcee/any child(or)children, into a case under DV Act 2005 and dispose of same as per Section 12(5) within 60 days, under the powers of Supreme Court, High Court and Sessions Court u/s 406, 407 and 408 Cr.P.C. respectively, as the case may be.

 

  1. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to all the Trial and Family Courts in India, adjudicating cases under Section 125 Cr.P.C. enactments, to convert/transfer every such case filed by any parent(s) or a Senior Citizen, into a case under Senior Citizens Act 2007 and dispose of same as per Section 5(4) within 60 days.

 

  1. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to the Respondents to formulate a comprehensive maintenance enactment, catering to the needs of all the members within a family, who live in a domestic relationship and under a roof of a shared/common household, without discriminating to only certain classes of citizens such as Senior Citizens in India.
    1. Giving effect to Article 15(1) of Constitution of India is equally important as to giving effect to Article 15(3).

 

Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged PIL - CrPC 125 or BNSS 144 Must Go From Statute Book

Guidelines on Grievances Received in The Department of Justice

Posted on April 11, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Some emails may fail. Find the correct/latest contact details by going to that specific department site.

Guidelines on Grievances Received in The Department of Justice
Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Leave a comment

IBA complaint against Justice Rohington Nariman

Posted on March 30, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

After the following order was passed by the Apex Court bench, IBA has filed this complaint.

National-Lawyers-Campaign-for-judicial-Transparency-Judgment

Here is the IBA complaint, in total.

IBA complaint against Justice Rohington Nariman
Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty IBA complaint against Justice Rohington Nariman | Leave a comment

Dr.Subramanian Swamy Vs Director CBI and Anr on 6 May, 1997

Posted on February 15, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Mr Subramanian Swamy got this section 6A of CBI’s DSPE Act (Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946) struck down as it was ultra vires to Article 14 of Constitution of India.

Dr.Subramanian Swamy Vs Director CBI and Anr on 6 May, 1997
Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged Dr.Subramanian Swamy Vs Director CBI and Anr Law or Provision is Alleged as Unconstitutional | Leave a comment

Journey through the years – Public Interest Litigation (PILs) in India

Posted on January 23, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

Let’s begin with the foremost judgment that raised curtain for Public Interest Litigations (PILs) in India, delivered by none other than the Super Judge, Shri Krishnaiyer, V.R.

 

  1. Municipal Council, Ratlam Vs Shri Vardhichand & Ors on 29 July, 1980
Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to Public Interest Litigation Summary Post Work-In-Progress Article | Leave a comment

Municipal Council, Ratlam Vs Shri Vardhichand & Ors on 29 July, 1980

Posted on January 23, 2019 by ShadesOfKnife

The first public interest litigation case in India.

 

Municipal Council, Ratlam Vs Shri Vardhichand & Ors on 29 July, 1980

Citation : 1980 AIR 1622, 1981 SCR (1) 97

Indiankanoon.org link : https://indiankanoon.org/doc/440471/


[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]

Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged Municipal Council Ratlam Vs Shri Vardhichand and Ors Public Interest Litigation | Leave a comment

Francis Coralie Mullin Vs The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi on 13 January, 1981

Posted on December 30, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

 

Now obviously when an under-trial prisoner is granted the facility of interviews with relatives and friends twice in a week under Rule 559A and a convicted prisoner is permitted to have interviews with his relatives and friends once in a week under Rule 550, it is difficult to understand how sub-clause (ii) of Clause 3(b) of the Conditions of Detention Order, which restricts the interview only to one in a month in case of a detenu, can possibly be regarded as reasonable and non-arbitrary, particularly when a detenu stands on a higher pedestal than an under-trial prisoner or a convict and, as held by this Court in Sampath Prakash’s case (supra) restrictions placed on a detenu must “consistent with the effectiveness of detention, be minimal.” We would therefore unhesitatingly hold sub-clause (ii) of clause 3(b) to be violative of Articles 14 and 21 in so far as it permits only one interview in a month to a detenu. We are of the view that a detenu must be permitted to have atleast two interviews in a week with relatives and friends and it should be possible for a relative or friend to have interview with the detenu at any reasonable hour on obtaining permission from the Superintendent of the Jail and it should not be necessary to seek the permission of the District Magistrate, Delhi, as the latter procedure would be cumbrous and unnecessary from the point of view of security and hence unreasonable. We would go so far as to say that even independently of Rules 550 and 559A, we would regard the present norm of two interviews in a week for prisoners as furnishing a criterion of what we would consider reasonable and non-arbitrary.

Francis Coralie Mullin Vs The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi on 13 January, 1981

Citation: 1981 AIR 746, 1981 SCR (2) 516

Indiakanoon link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/78536/

Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty Francis Coralie Mullin Vs The Administrator Union Territory of Delhi Right of Prisoners to be Interviewed Work-In-Progress Article | Leave a comment

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India And Ors. (Right to Privacy – Aadhaar Case)

Posted on December 29, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is the case in which Supreme Court held that Right to Privacy is a fundamental right as a part of Article 21, overruling M.P. Sharma And Ors. Vs Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi on 15 March 1954.

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India & Ors on 11 August, 2015

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India And Ors. on 24 August, 2017

Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India And Ors. on 26 September, 2018

List of other case laws around Article 21 are here.

Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged 5-Judge Constitutional Bench Decision Aadhaar Case Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) and Anr Vs Union Of India and Ors. Landmark Case Overrules MP Sharma Overruling Judgment Right to Privacy Work-In-Progress Article | Leave a comment

M.P. Sharma And Ors. Vs Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi on 15 March 1954

Posted on December 29, 2018 by ShadesOfKnife

This is the overruled judgment. By Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India And Ors. (Right to Privacy – Aadhaar Case).

M.P. Sharma And Ors. Vs Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi on 15 March, 1954

Citation: AIR 1954 SC 300, 1978 (2) ELT 287 SC, (1954) IMLJ 680 SC, 1954 1 SCR 1077

Indiankanoon link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/70398131/


The index page is here.

Posted in Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) | Tagged Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty M.P.Sharma And Ors. Vs Satish Chandra District Magistrate Delhi Overruled Judgment Right to Privacy Work-In-Progress Article | 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
yashtdp_ Yash @yashtdp_ ·
7 Jul

అమ్మో రేపు ఇడుపులపాయలో ఆస్కార్ రేంజ్ నటన ఉంటుంది.. 😂
@ysjagan

Reply on Twitter 2074438934722216327 Retweet on Twitter 2074438934722216327 59 Like on Twitter 2074438934722216327 252 X 2074438934722216327
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
drashokkmittal Ashok Kumar Mittal @drashokkmittal ·
8 Jul

𝐌𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝟑𝟒 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐠𝐨, 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚 𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐖𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧 𝐀𝐜𝐭, 𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟎, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐉𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟐, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐖𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧 (𝐍𝐂𝐖) 𝐰𝐚𝐬

Reply on Twitter 2074815442896703780 Retweet on Twitter 2074815442896703780 485 Like on Twitter 2074815442896703780 1191 X 2074815442896703780
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
thebetterindia The Better India @thebetterindia ·
8 Jul

He’s earning Rs. 55 lakh by turning what we throw away into a solution :droplet:

Gowri Shankar, founder of Vasudha Aqua, is tackling India’s hidden water crisis by recycling greywater from homes—showers, sinks, kitchens, and washing machines. His compact system purifies

Reply on Twitter 2074697483389902870 Retweet on Twitter 2074697483389902870 228 Like on Twitter 2074697483389902870 655 X 2074697483389902870
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
royalsinghz3 Royal Singh 🦁 @royalsinghz3 ·
8 Jul

2 Billion Muslim prayed for Zionist Messi to loose

But looks like Messi came with full preparation this time 😎

Reply on Twitter 2074704922202017945 Retweet on Twitter 2074704922202017945 1280 Like on Twitter 2074704922202017945 10051 X 2074704922202017945
Load More

Recent Posts

  • Application for Day-to-Day Trial – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft July 8, 2026
  • Pooja Ramesh Singh Vs JnK Bank and Anr on 02 Jul 2026 July 8, 2026
  • A.S.S.K.Durga Prasad Vs NCDRC and Ors on 24 Jun 2026 July 7, 2026
  • Application for Permanent Exemption from Appearance – Format, Procedure & Sample Draft July 7, 2026
  • Passport Implications in 498A Cases – A Complete Practical Guide July 7, 2026

Most Read Posts

  • Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice – Format with Legal Explanation (5,026 views)
  • Anu Aggarwal Vs Sushant Aggarwal on 20 Jan 2026 (3,571 views)
  • Umme Farva Vs State of U.P. and Anr on 14 Jan 2026 (3,487 views)
  • Charge Sheet and Final Report Explained (2,961 views)
  • Regular Bail Application Format (Section 437/439 CrPC) (2,326 views)
  • Neha Lal Vs Abhishek Kumar on 20 Jan 2026 (2,104 views)
  • Arrest Procedure in 498A cases after Arnesh Kumar (2,040 views)
  • Discharge Application Format in 498A Case – Draft, Procedure & Sample Template (1,882 views)
  • Can You Travel Abroad After an FIR Is Registered? – Legal Position Explained (1,822 views)
  • Life Cycle of a Perjury Case (1,718 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (435)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (421)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (385)Landmark Case (382)1-Judge Bench Decision (366)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (297)Work-In-Progress Article (215)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (101)Sandeep Pamarati (91)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (80)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (71)Perjury Under 340 CrPC (66)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)HM Act Sec 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (42)Divorce Granted on Cruelty ground (42)Legal Terrorism (41)Abuse Or Misuse of Process of Court (40)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (757)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 (187)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (164)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (112)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (95)Legal Procedure (83)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (71)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (62)LLB Study Material (59)General Study Material (56)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (53)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (51)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (47)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 Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification (28)High Court of Telangana Judgment or Order or Notification (28)

Recent Comments

  • eCourts India on Compromise-Based Quashing in Matrimonial Cases – Complete Legal Strategy
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • ShadesOfKnife on Sandeep Pamarati Vs Ungrateful Knife (IPC 498A Case)
  • KONURU VINAYKUMAR on Sandeep Pamarati Vs Ungrateful Knife (IPC 498A Case)

Archives of SoK

  • July 2026 (12)
  • 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 Cloudflare Status

  • Cloudflare Storage Maintenance July 16, 2026
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Jul 16, 12:00 - 13:00 UTC Jul 6, 22:38 UTC Scheduled - Cloudflare has scheduled maintenance for our backend storage systems. Services will continue to operate normally, but customers will be unable to create/delete/modify Client-Side Security settings via the Dashboard or the public API for a period of up to […]
    Cloudflare

RSS List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 35.237.231.140 | S July 8, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 5 | First: 2026-07-08 | Last: 2026-07-08
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 1394 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel