Latest news with #Section125
Time of India
30-05-2025
- Time of India
Woman dies after brick falls on her head from a three-storey building
Kochi: A 33-year-old woman who was undergoing treatment at a hospital after a brick fell on her head, succumbed to her injuries on Friday. Police identified the deceased as Arya of Moothakunnam. She was waiting at a bus stop in Munambam with her six-year-old daughter when the mishap occurred on Wednesday. The brick fell from a three-storey building under construction. Police suspect that the brick kept on a tarpaulin sheet to prevent it from getting blown away fell on the woman. Her daughter sustained minor injuries in the incident. Munambam police registered a case under Section 125 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for acts endangering the life or personal safety of others. Youth killed in accident: A 22-year-old man was killed after his two-wheeler collided with an ambulance at Kannankulangara at 11.45pm on Thursday. Police identified the deceased as Blesson Samson Abraham, a resident of Nadama, near Tripunithura. He sustained serious head injuries and his life could not be saved despite being rushed to a private hospital in Tripunithura, police said. Hill Palace police registered a case in the incident. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like ¡Trading con IA en Chile ayuda a usuarios a obtener ganancias potenciales! Mainhubfb Más información Undo The ambulance was transporting a patient from the Vaikom side to a hospital in Tripunithura. Migrant worker's body found: Fire and rescue personnel retrieved the body of a migrant worker's body from a river near Munambam harbour on Friday. The deceased was identified as 38-year-old Ramakrishna Biswas. The officers said that their Ernakulam control room on Friday morning received an alert that a migrant worker allegedly jumped into the river from a boat. The team later found his body during a search near a fuel pump in the Munambam harbor area.
Mint
28-05-2025
- General
- Mint
The split-up: How to protect your assets before and after marriage
When marriages end in divorce, it can get quite ugly, especially when it comes to dividing property and assets. The courts award both interim maintenance and final settlement amounts, even in the case of mutual divorce. These can impose a heavy burden upon one of the spouses. According to lawyers that Mint spoke to, several solutions are available. While none of them is foolproof, each can reduce the risk in litigation. Why you should protect your assets Marriage is generally entered into with the thought of living 'happily ever after' and few imagine that things will go sour. However, a certain percentage of marriages fail every year. There are no defined laws on the division of assets and court judgments can vary hugely according to the view taken by the judge overseeing the case. One spouse does not automatically get 50% of the assets and property. The courts aim to maintain the same standard of living for both spouses after separation, which could mean the spouse who brought a large number of assets into the marriage may suddenly find himself or herself compelled to pay a large sum as maintenance or final settlement. Also Read | Can divorce impact your credit score adversely? We explain here In the absence of defined laws, divorce cases can drag on for several years. A family lawyer, on condition of anonymity, told Mint it is a common practice to file interim maintenance applications under the Hindu Marriage Act, Domestic Violence Act and Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now replaced by the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita or BNSS). Once interim maintenance is granted, it can take five to seven years for a final decree. Prenuptial agreements In the case of marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act, the courts do not generally recognize prenuptial agreements. These are considered as opposed to public policy and hence void under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. "The law views Hindu marriage as a sacrament and not a contract. In the past, courts have taken a view that prenuptial agreements can be considered as promoting separation or divorce and are hence against public policy," said Varun Sriram, a partner at J Sagar Associates. Moreover, conditions in a prenuptial agreement that deny a spouse alimony or maintenance will be considered invalid because it overrides their statutory rights. However, the chances of recognition of prenups, or at least their persuasive value, are higher in the case of Muslims, Christians and Parsis, who are governed by different laws that recognize the contractual element in marriage. 'If you look at the Nikah namah under Muslim law or the Indian Divorce Act for Christians, there are some differences compared to the Hindu Marriage Act. Nikah namah, an Islamic marriage contract, can have certain terms and conditions of marriage, which can be considered in the nature of a prenup," Sriram said. Similarly, an ante-nuptial contract is explicitly recognised in the Divorce Act, 1869, which applies to Christians, said Ankur Borwankar, founder of Prenup India, a platform to create prenuptial agreements online with legal experts. The Portuguese Civil Code, 1867, which applies to persons domiciled in Goa, also recognizes ante-nuptial agreements. Prenups have a higher chance of recognition for Hindus marrying under the Special Marriage Act (SMA). 'Where parties are married under the Special Marriage Act, prenups in a relative sense may have more value since they wouldn't be considered violative of any personal law, otherwise applicable," said Sriram of JSA. A couple keen on entering a prenuptial agreement can consider registering their marriage under the SMA. This doesn't prevent them from having a separate wedding ceremony as per their customs. However, it should be noted that in such cases, succession laws will apply as per the Indian Succession Act. The personal laws of the spouses, regardless of their religion, will not determine inheritance. Sriram of JSA said in the recent past, family courts have looked at prenups more liberally to understand the context and intentions of the parties, which have helped them to avoid long-drawn contests and effectively conclude such matters. One such case is the Commissioner of Income Tax v Mansukhrai More (1988). The Calcutta High Court had to decide whether a trust created by the assessee for his children was for adequate consideration or not for income tax purposes. Also Read | Why is it essential to update child insurance policies after a divorce? Here are 6 key reasons The court held that the assessee was bound to create the trust under a prenuptial contract with his wife's mother and hence not liable for the additional assessed income. Thus, the court indirectly accorded recognition to prenuptial agreements. According to Sriram, under certain circumstances, it may be good for couples to consider and enter into prenuptial agreements to provide for and preempt certain aspects and protect their assets, especially related to pre-marriage assets and other inheritances. 'These agreements can be executed with nominal stamp duty and credible witnesses. Notarization, video recording, or registration are additional options if required," said Sriram. How can a trust help Forming a private trust before a marriage can help in separating and protecting pre-marital assets, including inherited property, from potential matrimonial disputes and division of assets in divorce proceedings. Dhanashree Datar, a legal advisor at LegaLogic, said under Indian matrimonial laws, assets acquired before marriage generally remain separate property, but complications arise when such assets are used for family purposes during the marriage. 'Such assets often commingle with marital property. A pre-marital trust creates a distinct legal entity that holds title to the settlor's (in this case the spouse who is creating the trust) assets, ensuring clear demarcation between pre-marital wealth and assets acquired during marriage. This structure provides protection against claims under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act or similar provisions in other personal laws, as trust assets remain legally separate from the spouse's personal estate," she said. Also Read | Do NRI marriages abroad impact succession rights in India? Sriram said while a trust is an option, it could have limitations. 'In settlement of immovable property, the restriction is that stamp duty remissions wouldn't apply even if the beneficiaries are related," said Sriram of JSA. Postnuptial agreements Can a postnuptial agreement be upheld in court? According to legal experts, they are not treated differently from prenup agreements. More importantly, when a marriage has already turned sour and the matter has reached the court already, any attempt to 'dispose of' or move assets into a separate entity can be regarded by the court as a deliberate attempt to frustrate alimony or divorce-related judgments about money. This includes creating a trust and transferring assets to parents or siblings. However, there are three assets that cannot be attached by the courts even if there is an adverse judgment against you. These are the balances in your Employees Provident Fund, Public Provident Fund and National Pension System. Another solution is to sign a postnuptial memorandum of understanding on how assets will be divided in the event of a divorce. While this, too, may not be enforced by the court, it can have persuasive value, according to Borwankar.
India Today
29-04-2025
- India Today
Sharia courts have no legal standing: Top court slams Kazi ruling in divorce case
The Supreme Court, in a recent ruling, reaffirmed that all Sharia courts, including entities referred to as "Kazi courts", "Darul Qaza", or "Kaziayat courts", hold no legal status under Indian law and directives or decisions issued by these bodies are not binding, nor can they be enforced through legal bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah made the observations while ruling on an appeal by a Muslim woman who had challenged an order by the Allahabad High Court upholding a family court's decision to deny her Suprem Court cited the 2014 ruling in Vishwa Lochan Madan vs Union of India, which had clarified that neither Sharia courts nor their fatwas enjoy recognition in Indian law. The top court reiterated that such institutions have no judicial standing and their pronouncements are not enforceable unless voluntarily accepted by the concerned parties and not in conflict with statutory law. In the current case, the family court had denied maintenance to the petitioner on the ground that she was responsible for the marital discord. Its conclusion relied heavily on a "settlement deed" presented before a "Kazi court" in Bhopal in Madhya Supreme Court strongly criticised this approach, stating that courts cannot rely on the declarations of non-judicial bodies like Sharia courts to determine legal entitlements. "Such declarations, even if voluntarily accepted, are at best applicable between the consenting parties and cannot bind third parties," the judgment petitioner was married on September 24, 2002 as per to Islamic rituals. It was the second marriage for both parties. In 2005, the husband had filed for divorce before a "Kazi court", which was dismissed after a settlement. Three years later, in 2008, he initiated a second divorce proceeding in a "Darul Qaza" court. That same year, the wife filed a petition for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure 2009, after the Sharia body permitted the divorce, a formal talaqnama was family court, however, ruled against the woman, stating that the husband had not abandoned her, instead, it blamed her behaviour for the breakdown of the marriage. The court further held that since it was the couple's second marriage, there was no presumption of dowry demand — a reasoning the Supreme Court dismissed as speculative and inconsistent with legal principles."The family court's observation that there was no likelihood of dowry demand because it was a second marriage is baseless and contrary to legal reasoning," the Supreme Court held. It also clarified that the so-called settlement deed presented before the Kazi court could not be the basis for denying top court directed the husband to pay Rs 4,000 per month as maintenance to the petitioner from the date she filed her petition in the family court.
News18
25-04-2025
- News18
Sharia Court Has No Recognition In Law: Supreme Court
Last Updated: The top court emphasised that any declaration or decision by such bodies, by whatever name labelled, is not binding on anyone and is unenforceable by resort to any coercive measure The Supreme Court has declared that Court of Kazi, Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat, Sharia Court, etc, by whatever name or style they may be, have no recognition in law, while allowing a maintenance plea by a Muslim woman under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah emphasised that any declaration or decision by such bodies, by whatever name labelled, is not binding on anyone and is unenforceable by resort to any coercive measure. 'The only way such declaration/decision can withstand scrutiny in the eye of law could be when the affected parties accept such declaration/decision by acting thereon or accepting it and when such action does not conflict with any other law. Even then, such declaration/decision, at best, would only be valid inter-se the parties that choose to act upon/accept the same, and not a third-party," the bench said. The court clarified the position of law while relying upon Vishwa Lochan Madan Vs Union of India (2014) as it found a Muslim man initially filed a plea in a Court of Kazi and Court of (Darul Kaja) Kajiyat seeking divorce from the wife. The bench here was dealing with a plea filed by Shahjahan questioning the Allahabad High Court's order of August 03, 2018, which dismissed her revision petition against the family court at Jhansi's order of April 23, 2010, denying her maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The family court allowed only Rs 2,500 for her two children. The marriage was solemnised on September 24, 2002, according to Islamic customs. This was the second marriage for both. After hearing the counsel for the woman and the state government, the bench noted the appellant-woman contended that her husband had caused cruelty to her as she was not able to fulfil his demand for a motorcycle and Rs 50,000. On this aspect, the family court noted that since it was their second marriage, there is no possibility of demand of dowry by the man, as he would be trying to rehabilitate his house. 'Such reasoning/observation by the family court is unknown to the canons of law and is based on mere conjecture and surmise. The family court will do well, henceforth, to bear in mind the observation in Nagarathinam Vs State, through the Inspector of Police (2023) that the '…Court is not an institution to sermonise society on morality and ethics …'," the bench said. The SC also emphasised that the family court could not have presumed that a second marriage for both parties would necessarily entail no dowry demand. The bench also objected to the family court, taking note of the 2005 compromise between the couple, opined that it was the appellant's character and conduct which led to the rift in the conjugal life of the parties. 'This reasoning is based on the purported fact that the appellant in the compromise deed had admitted to her mistake. However, from a bare perusal of the compromise deed, it would become clear that it records no such admission. The first 'divorce suit' instituted by the husband in 2005 was dismissed on the basis of this compromise, wherein both parties decided to live together and agreed that they would not give the other party any occasion to complain. Hence, the very basis/reasoning for rejecting the appellant's claim for maintenance appears to be ex-facie unsustainable," the bench said. The court also dealt with the question of from which date the maintenance will be payable—the date of the application or the date of the order. In the case, the SC noted, the appellant contested the direction of the family court wherein it had made the maintenance payable from the date of the order instead of the date of application. 'Of course, Section 125(2) of the Code empowers the court to award maintenance from the date of the order but the same has to be justified in the background of the attendant facts and circumstances and should not cause unnecessary hardship to the applicant. In our view, Section 125 of the Code is a beneficial piece of legislation which has been enacted to protect the wife and children from destitution and vagrancy and, in the usual course, it would not be appropriate to disadvantage the applicant for the delay in the disposal of the application by the judicial system," the bench said, relying upon Rajnesh Vs Neha (2021). Having noted the husband worked as Aarakshak (Constable) in BSF and earned Rs 15,000 when the application was filed in family court, the bench said it is to be borne in mind that this was the situation in 2008-2009 (nearly 16 years ago) and much water would have flown under the bridge since then. 'We are of the view that maintenance could not have been denied to the appellant-wife under the prevailing circumstances," the bench said, directing for payment of Rs 4,000 per month as maintenance to the appellant, from the date of filing of the maintenance petition before the family court. The court also clarified that the maintenance awarded to the children will also be payable from the date of filing of the maintenance petition. Since the daughter has attained majority, the SC said, the maintenance awarded in her favour will only be payable up to the date of her attaining majority. The court directed the husband to deposit the amount in the family court within four months after adjustment of amounts, if any, already paid. Get breaking news, top headlines, and live updates on politics, weather, elections, law and crime. Stay informed with real-time coverage and in-depth analysis. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : divorce marriage sharia supreme court Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: April 26, 2025, 04:19 IST
New Indian Express
23-04-2025
- Entertainment
- New Indian Express
Yami Gautam, Emraan Hashmi to headline film based on the Shah Bano case
The film will be directed by Suparn S Verma, who served as a creative producer on the Apoorva Singh Karki directorial Sirf Ek Bandaa Kaafi Hain , starring Manoj Bajpayee. The film pertains to the landmark case filed in 1978 by a 62-year-old Shah Bano, a mother of five children, seeking alimony from her lawyer husband Ahmed Khan, who had given her triple talaq. She sought alimony under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but Ahmed refused to pay her, citing Muslim Personal Law. Shah Bano ultimately moved the Supreme Court, which ruled that Section 125 applies to all Indian citizens and divorced women should receive alimony, regardless of their religion. The judgement, however, was diluted by the then Congress government, which passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, restricting the right of Muslim divorcees to alimony from their former husbands for only 90 days after the divorce (the period of iddah in Islamic law). The movie will be shot in multiple locations across Lucknow and Uttar Pradesh. As per reports, it has wrapped its Lucknow schedule. The film is expected to have a theatrical release sometime in October/November 2025.
