Advocate Sunil Sharma @AngrishSunil

Visiting family courts should be made mandatory before marriage in India… Save men.

@BerlinFamilyman Someone rightly said Talking is a womanly thing to do Men take actions But these days men are all talks.

Written laws mean nothing in this country when courts are not only acting arbitrary but are also not accountable to anyone for that arbitrary behavior.

Swati Goel Sharma @swati_gs

8 months ago

Bone test said she is 15. Dental test she is 14. Court said - let’s use margin of error to make her 18! She is now the bride of POCSO-accused, who has got a clean chit as her “lover” This is how lower courts are typically delivering judgements in cases of 13/14/15 year old

70 2K 5K 184K 335

This woman judge makes way more sense than her male counterparts. Another proof, it is not men vs. women. Its individuals.

Live Law @LiveLawIndia

2 weeks ago

Worst things the wives can do to write to the employer about their husband in a matrimonial litigation causing them to lose job. What maintenance amount can you see afterwards? - Justice BV Nagarathna remarks while hearing a transfer petition in a matrimonial case #SupremeCourt

22 139 470 29K 76

Judges giving politically and gender charged media statements are fine. Lawyers should be barred. Because private lawyers try to either make sense or atleast connect to their clients in grievance (even if that is purely for greed). So their statements go against complete anarchy that our system has become. One day married couple seeking protections against their spouse is fine and next day its immoral and can't be allowed. We live in a dream time.

That one man who initiated a fight for justice over his personal greed and gains. Rest of them settling by paying hefty settlements.

@LiveLawIndia And he'll turn this 3 lac cost into a 1 crore earning viral comic statement. Jokes will still be on Court. But Courts are not supposed to go anyway beyond this. Sometimes even jokers become more powerful than the kings. That's just laws of nature for you.

There's a huge gap in what system wants you to think about marriage, what you think marriage is and what marriage actually is. I'm comfortable with both, what marriage actually is and what system defines it as, but I'm not against "what you think marriage is". I want system to understand that system's definition should comply the demand of majority and keeping in view the welfare of society. But we're doomed here too. Even if system agrees to that, majority people only have a self centred opinion on definition of marriage. All they seek is benefit, not responsibility. And keeping this in view, system defines marriage in the most chaotic way while covering it up with labels, such as "WELFARE OF ALL" Let your husbands/wives have live-in with another partner, not punish it (or maybe sometimes actually punish it because the judge thought why not) and call it "WELFARE OF ALL". I mean, all those 4 people want this. I guess this exactly is the definition of majority demand and WELFARE OF ALL. Nothing good can come until society learns to live as society and not as individuals above all others. But who am I crying before? I'm either an MRA for a Feminist or a Feminist for an MRA.

The privileges of lying and filing false affidavits is limited to daughter in laws only. Son in laws can be punished for innocence.

Bar and Bench @barandbench

2 weeks ago

CJI Kant: The petitioner made a false statement to get anticipatory bail. We will not support such actions. What does he think, he is son in law of the system? #SupremeCourt

67 22 271 52K 27

Some domestic disputes taught me something I could never learn otherwise. Being stupid doesn't mean a person is bad. Person can be stupidly good or honest. You'll like them based on what you want from them, not what they are. And being intelligent doesn't mean a person is good. Evil Genius is still a thing. I've seen stupid good wives losing their home and evil geniuses disguising their misdeeds so good that their home didn't break. World is a strange place. The more you see.

@BerlinFamilyman @barandbench If we gave you that much time to care for your wife, she might fall in love with you. Then who'll come to court? Request rejected.

Before you read this, know that access to her records of adultery and illegitimate child are still prohibited. Because Courts provide absolute justice. No bias. Now for the news The Supreme Court has held that call detail records and hotel booking records can be summoned as evidence to prove allegations of adultery in matrimonial proceedings. The case arose from a divorce petition filed by a wife, who accused her husband of cruelty and adultery and sought access to hotel records and call data.

@ZxG_09 @Indianpatriachy I never justified what destruction Judiciary has brought to family system. They're undoubtedly the absolute chaos. But does that make us good? Look at us, fighting for our respective genders. Not for the crime to be punished. Courts and government benefit from this.

@ZxG_09 @Indianpatriachy Gender is more important than finding crimes and punishing criminals these days. Absolute shock that it is not being done by Judiciary or Government. It is us. Absolute stupid of a generation.

Struggling to convey a message for these many years. While absolutely rejecting the tag of MRA. Still get called MRA by Feminists and Feminist by MRAs. People don't understand honesty or transparency. You're either with them or against them.

@BerlinFamilyman If a judge has a gender in mind, he failed to be a judge. Fellow men or fellow women. Justice needs to be protected. Not individuals or groups of individuals.

File your affidavit so we can doubt you. And if your wife files false disclosure. Its ok. No action. .....Justice 2025

That's why my fingers always point straight at how courts interpret laws, rather than finding faults with the law. To allow some lady have extra marital affairs, they'd go as far as to abolish settled laws. While completely guarding them when they make false statements in the court.

@BerlinFamilyman They aren't. Their interpretations are. Courts are to blame. Everything can be fixed without a single amendment in laws. Just the change in Court's approach towards it.

My comments below the news portion: News: The Karnataka High Court has held that a father who voluntarily relinquished his visitation rights in a mediated divorce settlement cannot later seek to enforce such rights after failing to discharge his parental responsibilities, observing that “When he is not ready to take-up the responsibility of the child financially and emotionally, he can’t interfere in the life of the child for visitation again. When he avoids duty, he can’t get rights.” I agree on this. A 100% But then how can a woman not waive her rights in financial settlement for divorce? She got paid. Owes no duty to husband. She chooses not to move on or work for herself. How is husband responsible foe all this and forced to pay the maintenance, after paying permanent alimony?