Vivek's legal notes

  Respected Madam, You're a very senior, highly accomplished criminal lawyer with a stupendous track record. Your contribution in protection of truth and justice in this country is well known and I am extremely grateful to you for that. I would strongly urge you to consider these questions: 1) Is it ethical and legal to have an amicus curiae who is strongly biased towards one side for the matter at hand? 2) Can a biased amicus, who functions as the extended mind of the court, can cause violation of natural justice and principle of nemo judex by making the court biased as well? 3) Do you have a strong bias in favor of marital rape law (an evidence being  this article ) or has your stand changed over the years and you feel you can render an unbiased service to the court in this matter? I fully trust you and do not doubt your ability in doing your job with full honesty and in an ethical way. I am just too much worried about the misuse, practical challenges in standard o...

Sex in marriage is implied and expected. If a husband can force himself on the wife, then since both are staying together all the time, there will be times when the wife will be forcing herself on the husband. If your core argument is on art 14 (equality before law) and art 21 (right to live with dignity), then by treating violation of wife as crime without providing equal right to husband to seek remedy, it is violating art 14 and art 21 for the husband. S 375 is only for women because IPC itself is almost 150 years old when women mostly stayed inside the home and men were outside. The chances of a woman attacking a stranger man were so low that lawmakers found it fine to quickly provide remedy only to women. When we talk of dynamics inside home , both man and woman are staying together. It is understood that there will be times when woman would want to have sex (unless you want to argue that sexual desires and needs of a woman does not exist and it only exists in man) when a man is n...

  0) framing of issues Order 14 0) Plaint Description Order 7 1) To delete/Add parties ORDER 1 RULE 10. 2) Amendment of Suit to add defendants ORDER 1 RULE 10(4) 3) Substitute service ORDER 5 RULE 20 4) Amendment of pleadings ORDER 6 RULE 17 5) Additional W.S ( Rejoinder ) ORDER 8 RULE 9 6) Setting aside ex-parte order ORDER 9RULE 7 7) Restoration ORDER 9 RULE 9 Set aside ex-parte decree ORDER 9 RULE 13 9) To order production of documents ORDER 11 RULE 14 11) Inspection of documents ORDER 11 RULE 15 12) To produce documents ORDER12 RULE 8 13) Production of documents ORDER 7 RULE 14(3) 14) To return unmarked documents ORDER 13 RULE 7(2) 15) To return marked Documents 13 RULE 9 16) Adjournment 17 RULE 1 17) Recalling witness 18 RULE 17 18) To grant installments after decree passed ORDER 20 RULE 11(2) 19) Stay of execution ORDER 21 RULE 26 20) Delivery of immovable property ORDER 21 RULE 35 21) To Break open door ORDER 21 RULE 35(3) 22) Attachments of movables of JDRs ORDER 21RULE 43 ...

  Respected Sir, I found an  article on web  that you're arguing in favor of gender biased law on marital rape where practically any disgruntled women who want to break away from marriage for any reason without any fault of innocent husband can use this law to blackmail, extort the husbands and label a husband with the most henious of crimes effectively destroying his life and the life of his family including his parents and siblings etc.  This at the time when men had slipped into minority about two decades ago with high misuse of law and have been suffering immeasurable hurt & losses due to draconian laws like 498A, DV, 376, 354 where mere testimony of women is sufficient to convict males. (Yes, sir, I am only a nano-particle before your knowledge and experience but knows a thing or two about these laws and its real impact on the ground). Few links from one of the activists ( Martyrs of Marriage ,  Story of a father ,  Rarest of rare where a false acc...

Suggestion 1 : Gender Neutral IPC Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D, 375, 376, 509 as also suggested in Criminal Law Amendment bill of 2019 Gender neutral IPC Section 354, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D, 375, 376, 509 by replacing 'woman', 'man' with 'person' / 'any person' and any gender biased pronoun like 'he' / 'she' with neutral pronoun 'they' / 'them' / 'their' / 'this person' as appropriate along with definition of modesty to be inserted in S 2 of IPC. Similar demands were also raised in Criminal Law Amendment bill of 2019 tabled with full details and it was tabled as private member bill by KTS Tulsi which can be referred as part and parcel of this suggestion. The key idea is to recognize that all three genders are equally capable of committing any crime and it is against basic principles of constitution to provide protection to a particular gender from being accused of a crime especially in modern day...