Only written statement not enough for divorce | india | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
May 30, 2017-Tuesday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Only written statement not enough for divorce

JUSTICE BB Agrawal of the Lucknow bench of the high court has held as illegal a Muslim man?s divorce to his wife only through ?a mere written statement? and quashed the family court acceptance of the same?

india Updated: Aug 12, 2006 01:09 IST

JUSTICE BB Agrawal of the Lucknow bench of the high court has held as illegal a Muslim man’s divorce to his wife only through ‘a mere written statement’ and quashed the family court acceptance of the same?

The judge has directed the husband to give a monthly maintenance of Rs 500 from April 20, 1993 when she had applied for the same.

The family court had granted her maintenance for only two months on the plea that the husband had divorced her through a written statement.

The landmark order was passed on a petition filed by Shakeela Bano on April 20, 1993. Her lawyer Mohammad Wasim submitted before the court that her husband Nizam Ali, resident of Hardoi, had deserted her and their three sons, the youngest being a minor.

The lawyer further submitted that Shakeela filed a suit for maintenance for herself and the three children.

The husband filed a written statement on June 17, 1993 announcing a divorce. He neither supported his announcement through any evidence nor appeared in the witness box to be examined by the court on his statement.

Additional Principal Judge, Family Court Lucknow, passed the judgment on April 15, 1998 and ordered that Shakeela would get maintenance only for two months from April 20 till June 17, 1993 when the husband had divorced her.

Justice Agrawal, before allowing the petition of the wife, observed, “Merely on the basis of the plea raised by the husband in the written statement, the trial court was not justified in accepting the plea of divorce by the husband, particularly when even the husband could not dare to appear in the witness box in support of his contention in the written statement regarding divorce.

The order does not show that any other evidence was there on record to establish divorce.”

Capital sentence upheld

THE CAPITAL sentence granted to accused Lalit Kumar Yadav alias Kurri by the Barabanki sessions court on February 5, 2005 has been upheld by the third Judge Justice SN Shukla of the High Court Bench here.

Earlier, two judges of the Bench while hearing the criminal appeal of the accused had given a divided opinion whereby one had upheld the death sentence while the other had acquitted the accused. Consequently, the matter was referred to a third Judge to get a majority decision.

Justice SN Shukla of the High Court after going through the matter upheld the capital sentence. Justice Bhanwar Singh had upheld the capital sentence while Justice Shailendra Saxena had acquitted the accused.

Judges take initiative

IN COMPLIANCE to the directives issued by the Lucknow Bench of the High Court to check MV Act violations, the High Court Judges and authorities have themselves ensured removal of irregular number plates from their official vehicles. To begin with, Justices Pradeep Kant, Abdul Mateen, OP Srivastava, DP Singh, SS Chauhan etc. got their irregular number plates removed from their vehicles.