LawBeat Profile picture
Feb 7 15 tweets 3 min read
Delhi High Court to start hearing plea against the marital rape exception in IPC.
Sr Adv Colin Gonsalves to continue with arguments.
Gonsalves refers to a document stating that "it is not in conformity with Hindu religion and traditions to say that consent is required to have sexual relations with one's own wife."
Gonsalves: India in the Fourth World Women Conference was not unhappy with the proposal of marital rape but expressed reservations.
Gonsalves cites a document, says this is why it is so important for India to take up the issue and take action on the same.
Gonsalves cites a study to show that 62% women agree that men expect wife/partner to agree when they want to have sex.
Gonsalves cites figures of marital rape from across the country basis a study.
SG Mehta: I don't mean to interrupt but my Ld. Friend is virtually re-arguing.

Gonsalves: Despite 6 years having passed the Union has not taken a stand on the issue, says the matter is "not urgent".
Gonsalves reads out.
Gonsalves refers to NCRB data which shows marital rape is significant crime in the country.

J: It doesn't specifically refer to rape by husband.

Gonsalves: yes, it doesn't because marital rape is not a crime yet.
Gonsalves now refers to affidavit of Government of India.

Tushar Mehta: It is not the Government's stand the exception should go or stay. I don't know what Arora is referring to.

J: Isn't miss Arora working under you?

Mehta: We all work for the Government of India.
SG Mehta: if anything is filed by anyone, it is not the Central Government's stance.

Government is committed to maintain protect the dignity and liberty of women. But we are dealing with a larger issue here.
SG refers to a document and reads out.

Provisions of 375 needs a meaningful consultative process. Some of the parties are not even affected parties. No state government is here.

This Court can be assisted after a consultative process.
Central governments asks for deferring the hearing. The matter is waiting since 2015, no prejudice will be caused.

Every state has some suggestion to make. Merely taking sone treaty from somewhere will not meet ends of justice.
We are entering the bedroom of someone.

Please decide after a meaningful consultative process.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with LawBeat

LawBeat Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @LawBeatInd

Feb 8
Senior Advocate Nakul Dewan appearing for amazon mentions Amazon matter stating that, we wish to file brief written submissions.
CJI- You want to complicate matter we have no issue, order is ready now you want to file affidavit, we'll have to issue notice we'll also give opportunity to other side.
I don't understand what is this practice.

Senior Advocate KV Viswanathan submits Milords we are opposing.
CJI- Mr Viswanathan you are for the other side, if you want to file, you also file.

CJI- It's a luxurious litigation it appears.
How many pages is going to be?

Dewan- 7 pages.

CJI- 7 pages in a small matter.
Read 4 tweets
Feb 8
Delhi High Court will today start hearing a batch of petitions demanding registration of first information reports (FIRs) against several politicians for their role in instigating the #DelhiRiots. Image
Sr. Adv. Colin Gonsalves for one of the petitioners: We have submitted a compilation.

#DelhiRiots
HC: There are prayers like provide food etc to affected families, ensure protection and safety of affected families of #DelhiRiots, these are not relevant anymore.
Read 49 tweets
Feb 8
#Karnataka High Court to hear case of Resham Farooq, filed through her brother seeking relief on account of alleged denial by the Government PU college for 8 girl students allegedly on account of wearing Hijab before a bench of Justice Krishna Dixit #KarnatakaHijabRow Image
Devdatt Kamat, Sr.Adv requests for listing of fresh writ petition which was moved yesterday challenging the GO. Court permits for listing of this matter with other similar matters . #KarnatakaHijabRow #karnatakahijab
AG for #Karnataka says he is ready to argue #KarnatakaHijabRow
Abhishek Janardhan counsel for petitioner: I seek for a short date for matter milords as there are other cases coming.
J
ustice Dixit: The quantity of matters does not matter,if we decide one matter, the rest is good
Read 107 tweets
Feb 8
#SupremeCourt to continue hearing a batch of petitions challenging provision of Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
#PMLA
#MoneyLaundering Image
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for the petitioner- In terms of the act: Use, Projecting and Claiming it to be untainted are three heads, without your Lordships finding these three heads it would be stretching of an offence to bring Money Laundering.
Singhvi: To suggest it to be diluted (the three heads) would not be a correct way of interpreting it.
#PMLA
#MoneyLaundering
Read 26 tweets
Feb 7
BREAKING: The District and Sessions Court, Haridwar has granted bail to Yati Narsinghanand, the head priest of Dasna Devi temple (Uttar Pradesh) in 'Haridwar Dharam Sansad' alleged hate speech case.
@ISalilTiwari reports
lawbeat.in/top-stories/br…
Note: Some News portals have incorrectly reported that Narsinghanand has been granted bail in a case registered u/s 295,509,323,504, and 153A of the Indian Penal Code.

In the instant case, he was arrested only for offences u/s 153A and 295A.
Important observations by the court:
1. The court has noted that the prosecution itself has accepted that the informant in the instant matter, Gulbahar Khan, was not present at the Dharm Sansad. He filed a case only on the basis of a video he saw on Facebook.
Read 7 tweets
Feb 7
The Madras High Court grants bail to a suspected Maoist on condition that she would file a sworn affidavit in Tamil owing faith and allegiance to the Indian Constitution and stating that she does not believe in Maoism.
#MadrasHighCourt
Court said that in cases where people wedded to a certain ideology are involved, they do everything possible to prevent the conduct of the trial and such things remain unknown to the media or the outside world.
#madrashighcourt
“On account of such dilatory tactics adopted by the accused, evidences disappear eventually leading to their acquittal. At that time, there will be a hue and cry saying that the system, without any material thereof, had kept the person in prolonged incarceration," court added.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

:(