Mohit
44.8K posts

Mohit retweetledi

कथावाचक अनिरुद्धचार्य ने भावुक होते हुए NEET पेपर लीक वाले मामले पर मुखर होते हुए कहा ,
" सरकार चाहती है आप पढ़ो ही ना , क्यूंकि अगर आप पढोगे तो नौकरी मांगोगे , वो चाहते है आप बेरोजगारी भत्ता 2000 - 3000 रुपये लेते रहे लेकिन नौकरी नहीं मांगे , आप एग्जाम दोगे लीक हो जाएगा , अगला पेपर कब होगा पता नहीं , यही तो देश का सबसे बड़ा घोटाला है ",
हिन्दी

Yeh lund poori duniya mein bharat ki bezati kara ke maanege.
Dr Ranjan@DocRGM_
Demented Andhbhakts of Gujarat "I'll Pay Rs 500 Per Litre Of Petrol."
हिन्दी
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi

@ManuvadiBrijesh Marriage age should be reduced to 14 to 15 is time demand, now days people are aware of everything. Now days even 12 years old boys/girls are involved is sexual activity buying condoms from medical store.......
English
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi

@venom1s Wht will u do with d virginity tag bro in ths generation find a person who can love u selfless n grow up s** is not d problem it's d mentality of few ppl tht needs to change if ur not a good man even a virgin can not satisfy ur sick 🤢 mind
English
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi

▪️In Shamshada Akhter v. Ajaz Parvaiz Shah, Srinagar court imposed a fine of Rs. 10 Lakhs on a wife who had misused the provisions of the DV Act, 2005 to harass her husband and deprive him of access to his own residential house. Court directed that the amount be paid to the husband as compensation for the “pain, agony, inconvenience, and litigation expenses” suffered by him after being deprived of shelter in his own house.
▪️The matter arose from a petition filed by the wife u/s 12 DV Act in 2019, alleging domestic violence by her husband, Ajaz Parvaiz Shah. An ex-parte order dated 23.03.2019 restrained the husband from entering the shared household, following which he was forcibly removed from his own house with the assistance of police authorities.
▪️The husband contended that the wife had abused the interim protection granted under DV Act to dispossess him from the jointly owned matrimonial home. Subsequently, on 29.04.2019, the trial court modified the earlier order and directed both parties to accommodate each other peacefully in the shared household, and directed wife to provide 2 rooms to husband in the same house.
▪️Despite this, wife challenged the order before multiple judicial forums, including the Appellate Court, High Court u/s 482 CrPC, a Letters Patent Appeal, and finally Supreme Court through an SLP, but failed at every stage.
▪️The court noted that after losing before every judicial forum, wife suddenly moved an application seeking unconditional withdrawal of DV petition on “personal reasons.” The husband opposed the withdrawal and argued that the attempt was mala fide and aimed solely at frustrating the implementation of the order restoring his right to reside in the shared household. He further argued that the wife had dragged him through prolonged litigation merely to ensure that he remained excluded from his own home.
▪️After examining the surrounding circumstances, court concluded that the withdrawal was strategically sought only after the wife had exhausted every legal remedy against the husband.
▪️Court further cautioned that misuse of such protective legislation could dilute its effectiveness for genuine victims.
#DVact #Misuse #HusbandWife

English
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi
Mohit retweetledi















