Latest news with #AnamRaisKhan
Time of India
3 days ago
- Time of India
Woman hides divorce settlement, court acts
New Delhi: A Delhi court recently initiated suo motu proceedings against a woman for filing a criminal case against her estranged husband despite receiving half of the agreed-upon settlement under the divorce proceedings. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Anam Rais Khan of Mahila Courts in Saket courts observed that such conduct cannot be left unchecked and has to be nipped in the bud. "This is prima facie not only the violation of the order of the learned Family Court and the undertaking given by the complainant on oath before the said court but also an attempt to deceive this court by filing the present petition without making any mention of the settlement arrived at between the parties and the benefit derived by her under the said settlement. This also amounts to the filing of a false affidavit before this court by active concealment of material facts and is a sheer abuse of the process of law and misuse of provisions enacted for the protection of women," the judge said. The court will hear the matter next on June 30. The court noted that she accepted 10 lakh as part of the settlement and benefited from it without fully complying with the terms agreed upon by the family court. Therefore, it ordered that separate proceedings under sections 340 (inquiry by court) read with 195(1)(b) (power of court to take cognizance) of the CrPC be initiated against the complainant-woman. The couple filed for divorce through mutual consent, and an order was passed on the first motion on Nov 22, 2022. Under the settlement, the woman was to receive a total of 19 lakh. She was paid 10 lakh initially, and the husband said he would pay the rest of the amount as well.
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi court acts against woman for hiding facts over divorce settlement: 'Nipped in the bud'
A Delhi court on Monday reportedly initiated criminal proceedings against a woman for allegedly concealing the fact that she received ₹10 lakh during her divorce settlement. The court said that any misuse of the law meant for women's protection had to be 'nipped in the bud,' according to a PTI news agency report. "Complainant has admitted that all the disputes between the parties were already settled before the family court of southeast district and the first motion of divorce by mutual consent was passed on November 22, 2022, pursuant to which, the complainant received a sum of ₹10 lakh, out of the total settlement amount of ₹19 lakh…," judicial magistrate Anam Rais Khan, who was hearing the case said on April 25, as quoted by PTI. The husband was willing to pay the outstanding amount, but these crucial facts were concealed by the complainant in the present petition, the order added. The court said, 'Complainant deliberately did not appear for recording of her statement for the second motion of divorce by mutual consent before the family court.' It further added that the former husband despite paying ₹10 lakh, is standing on the same footing, and the present case was filed after receiving the said amount. There was a prima facie violation of the family court's order and the undertaking given on oath to the family court too. The court called this a sheer abuse of process of law and misuse of provisions enacted for the protection of women. It sought the woman's response after directing separate proceedings against her under Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) Sections 340 and 195 (1) (b). The next hearing is scheduled on June 30. Section 195(1)(b) of the CrPC deals with offences against public justice and offences relating to documents produced in court whereas Section 340 outlines the procedure when a court believes that an inquiry should be made into an offence related to proceedings in that court.
Hindustan Times
4 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Delhi court initiates action against woman for hiding facts over divorce
New Delhi, A Delhi court has initiated criminal proceedings against a woman for allegedly concealing the fact that she received ₹10 lakh during her divorce settlement and said any misuse of the law meant for women's protection had to be nipped in the bud. Judicial Magistrate Anam Rais Khan was hearing a criminal complaint case filed by the woman. In an order dated April 25, made available recently, the court said, "Complainant has admitted that all the disputes between the parties were already settled before the family court of southeast district and the first motion of divorce by mutual consent was passed on November 22, 2022, pursuant to which, the complainant received a sum of ₹10 lakh, out of the total settlement amount of ₹19 lakh…" The estranged husband was willing to pay the outstanding amount, but these crucial facts were concealed by the complainant in the present petition, it noted. "Complainant has also admitted to having already utilised the part-settlement amount of ₹10 lakh and deliberately did not appear for recording of her statement for the second motion of divorce by mutual consent before the family court," the court said. The woman, the court said, derived benefit from the settlement with the estranged husband without honouring the terms of the settlement. "In a nutshell, respondent 1 , despite paying ₹10 lakh, is standing on the same footing, and the present case was filed after receiving the said amount," the order said. The verdict found a prima facie violation of the family court's order and the undertaking given by the woman on oath to the family court aside from an "attempt to deceive the present court" by filing the petition without mentioning the settlement arrived at. "This also amounts to filing of false affidavit before this court by active concealment of material facts and is a sheer abuse of process of law and misuse of provisions enacted for the protection of women. Such conduct cannot be left unchecked and has to be nipped in the bud," the court said. Directing that separate proceedings be initiated against her under Code of Criminal Procedure Sections 340 and 195 , the court sought her response. Section 195 of the CrPC deals with offences against public justice and offences relating to documents produced in court whereas Section 340 outlines the procedure when a court believes that an inquiry should be made into an offence related to proceedings in that court. The court then posted the matter on June 30.
