LawSikho

𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝟏𝟔𝐭𝐡, 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟐, 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐡𝐢.
23-year-old physiotherapy intern boarded a private bus with a friend after watching a movie. Unbeknownst to them, the bus carried six men, including the driver and a juvenile, who turned a routine journey into a nightmare. The victim was brutally gang-r**ed, tortured, and her friend was savagely beaten. She was rushed to Safdarjung Hospital in Delhi and later transferred to Singapore, where she succumbed to her injuries on December 29, 2012.

News of the crime spread like wildfire, igniting rage across the nation. Images of the victim, battling for her life in a Singapore hospital, became a stark symbol of the vulnerability women faced every day. Protests erupted in Delhi and across India. She 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 “𝐍𝐢𝐫𝐛𝐡𝐚𝐲𝐚”, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐚 𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐫𝐲 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐠𝐫𝐮𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠, with the prosecution facing immense challenges in proving the guilt of the accused. The adequacy of existing laws and the urgency for reform dominated national conversation. Eyewitness testimonies and forensic evidence were meticulously scrutinized. The fight for justice extended beyond the courtroom, reflecting societal values & the need for change.

The court's verdict, delivered in September 2013, resonated across the nation. All six accused were convicted of r**e, murder, & other charges. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐣𝐮𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐭, Md. Afroz, was convicted of r**e and murder under the Juvenile Justice Act and given the maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment in a reform facility. This was a crucial step, but the fight wasn't over. Legal challenges and appeals stretched on for years. Finally, on March 20, 2020, the four remaining adult convicts were executed, bringing a long-awaited closure for Nirbhaya's family.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐢𝐫𝐛𝐡𝐚𝐲𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬 𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐬. It serves as a potent catalyst for ongoing efforts towards combating sexual violence, promoting gender equality, and ensuring robust legal safeguards. The "𝐍𝐢𝐫𝐛𝐡𝐚𝐲𝐚 𝐀𝐜𝐭," 𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝟐𝟎𝟏𝟑, stands as a testament to the power of collective outrage. This legislation expanded the definition of r**e, increased penalties, and established fast-track courts for r**e cases.

𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐧𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐥, Nirbhaya’s story continues to inspire. The fight for a world where women can walk freely and fearlessly rages on, fueled by her memory and the unwavering spirit of justice. She became a powerful symbol of hope, reminding us that even in the darkest of times, the fight for a better future is always worth waging.

Tea time for tense times.

𝐀 𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐥. 𝐀 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲. 𝐀 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐭. 𝐀 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐮𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐝.

In 1999, a 𝐠𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐡𝐢 𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐥𝐲. Jessica Lal, a rising model, was working as a bartender when a powerful man, Manu Sharma, demanded drinks after closing time. When she refused, he opened fire, silencing Jessica forever.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐚 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐨𝐛𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧. Jessica's fame fueled public outrage, but Manu Sharma's connections cast a long shadow. Could justice be served without a single eyewitness to the murder?

The answer hinged on a web of 𝐜𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞. Fragments of the night - a snatched glimpse, a discarded shell, a desperate plea for the gun - became crucial pieces of the puzzle. The media became a relentless watchdog, pressuring authorities to uncover the truth.

The initial trial shockingly acquitted Manu Sharma and his accomplices. But public outcry wouldn't be silenced. The case went to the High Court, where the weight of circumstantial evidence finally brought a conviction. 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐮 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐦𝐚 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭.

Yet, in 2020, Manu Sharma was released early, sparking renewed debate. The Jessica Lal case became a symbol of the struggle for justice against the powerful, a 𝐚 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.

This case continues to raise questions: 𝐂𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐞 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥? 𝐈𝐬 𝐜𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐮𝐦𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡? 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐥𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐞?

𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐜𝐚 𝐋𝐚𝐥'𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫.

Protecting the environment was always of crucial importance.

A salute to LawSikho's trailblazer Ankita Srivastava, congrats on hitting the $100,000 mark! We’re thrilled for you. Here’s rooting for the next $100,000.

I𝐈𝐧 𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟔, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐚 𝐛𝐫𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐥𝐚𝐰 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐋𝐚𝐰, 𝐃𝐞𝐥𝐡𝐢 𝐔𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐲, Priyadarshini Mattoo, was extinguished in a brutal act of r**e and murder. The prime suspect – Santhosh Kumar Singh, a fellow law student – enjoyed a chilling advantage: his father was a high-ranking police officer.

Despite initial complaints from Priyadarshini about stalking and harassment by Singh, the investigation, shrouded in suspicion, failed to gather substantial evidence. In 1999, to the outrage of the public and media, Singh was acquitted. Yet, Priyadarshini's story refused to be buried. Public outcry fueled by media scrutiny forced a re-𝐚 𝐫𝐞-𝐢𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐁𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐮 𝐨𝐟 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 (𝐂𝐁𝐈). 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞, 𝐚 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐨𝐧 𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐝: 𝐃𝐍𝐀 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲.

The new investigation meticulously collected evidence and presented a compelling case. The DNA samples found at the crime scene and on Priyadarshini matched Singh's profile. Witnesses corroborated the narrative and revealed a history of stalking and harassment by Singh towards Priyadarshini.

Singh's defense countered fiercely. They claimed the evidence was fabricated and the investigation biased due to his father's influence. They argued that circumstantial evidence alone couldn't prove his guilt.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐍𝐀 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞, the potential influence of Singh's family background, and the weight of circumstantial evidence. The court meticulously examined allegations of misconduct during the initial investigation, ensuring a fair trial.

In 2006, the Delhi High Court overturned the initial acquittal, convicting Santhosh Kumar Singh of Priyadarshini's r**e and murder. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐥𝐞𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐍𝐀 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐞𝐬, sentencing Singh to life imprisonment.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐲𝐚𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐢 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐃𝐍𝐀 𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐡𝐧𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐲 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞, 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬. It exposed the need for unbiased investigations, emphasizing fair treatment regardless of social standing. Moreover, it showcased the immense power of public and media pressure to ensure a just outcome.

𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐲𝐚𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐢'𝐬 𝐬𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐯𝐨𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡, 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐚𝐧'𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞.

Ghosting such requests like it's my job🥲

𝐁𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐚𝐲, 𝟏𝟗𝟓𝟗.

That’s where this story begins.

Today, we look at 𝐊.𝐌. 𝐍𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢 𝐯. 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐌𝐚𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐡𝐭𝐫𝐚, a case that led to the phasing out of jury trials in criminal law.

Commander Kawas Manekshaw Nanavati was a decorated Indian Navy officer who had settled in Bombay with his English-born wife Sylvia and their kids.

Soon, the domestic bliss would be shattered with Sylvia falling in love with Prem Ahuja, a close friend of Nanavati's.

On April 27th, 1959, after Sylvia confessed to her affair with Ahuja, Nanavati dropped off his family to a movie before heading to his naval base. There, he picked a pistol under false pretenses. He then confronted Ahuja at his residence, and during a heated exchange, shot Ahuja dead. Nanavati subsequently surrendered to the authorities, leading to a highly publicized jury trial.

Nanavati's lawyers argued for leniency, claiming the killing was a result of "𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐝𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧". The prosecution, however, argued premeditation, citing Nanavati’s acquisition of the gun and his deliberate pursuit of Ahuja. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐣𝐮𝐫𝐲 𝐚𝐜𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐍𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢.

𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬𝐧'𝐭 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐨𝐦𝐛𝐚𝐲 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐣𝐮𝐫𝐲'𝐬 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭, 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐟𝐥𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐲𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞. The High Court ordered a retrial, and Nanavati was found guilty of murder by a bench trial. The Supreme Court of India upheld this conviction, ruling that the time lapse between Nanavati's discovery of the affair and the killing negated the defense of sudden provocation, indicating premeditation.

The Nanavati case had far-reaching legal implications. It exposed the vulnerabilities of the jury system, highlighting how public opinion and media influence could sway jurors. Consequently, this case led to the abolition of jury trials in India, shifting to judge-only trials to ensure more impartial and legally sound judgments.

The case also sparked a nationwide debate on 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐜𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐮𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐬, prompting the judiciary to reconsider the balance between legal principles and emotional contexts.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐢 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐦𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐈𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲, 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦. It serves as a reminder of how societal norms and biases can affect legal proceedings, and the ongoing effort to balance emotions with legal principles.

When it comes to working on weekends, lawyers take home the gold, silver, and bronze every time!

“𝐍𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲? 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭’𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭?”

The year is 2006. Indian divorce laws, particularly the 𝐇𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮 𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐭 (𝟏𝟗𝟓𝟓), only considered fault-based reasons like adultery, cruelty, or desertion as grounds for divorce.

𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞.

Today, we take a look at how 𝐍𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐊𝐨𝐡𝐥𝐢 𝐯𝐬. 𝐍𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐮 𝐊𝐨𝐡𝐥𝐢 pushed the law to adapt and address the evolving challenges of family life.

Naveen Kohli (appellant) and Neelu Kohli (respondent) got married in 1975. They had three sons, a successful business, and even separate factories for their sons.

Things were far from okay in the Kohli household. Naveen said Neelu was rude to him and his parents. By 1994, things got even worse, prompting Naveen to move out of their home.

During their travel to Bombay for Neelu’s father’s silver jubilee wedding anniversary, things took a bad turn, leading Naveen to file for divorce in a Family Court. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐦𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐦𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭.

The accusations flew. Naveen suspected Neelu of infidelity and meddling in his business affairs. He claimed she withdrew a significant sum from their joint account and even fabricated criminal charges against him. Neelu, on the other hand, painted a picture of emotional and physical abuse.

The courtroom became a battleground. Lawyers dissected tales of cruelty and financial manipulation. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐱 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐚 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐝 - "𝐜𝐫𝐮𝐞𝐥𝐭𝐲." 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐢𝐝 𝐢𝐭 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐥𝐲 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐱𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐚 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐠𝐞? 𝐃𝐢𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐯𝐨𝐰𝐬?

The weight of evidence, and years of undeniable discord, spoke volumes. The court, in 2006, acknowledged the heartbreaking reality – the Kohlis' love story had tragically ended. 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐍𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐞𝐧'𝐬 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐣𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐠𝐧𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐛𝐨𝐥𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐩: 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 "𝐢𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐨𝐟 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐠𝐞" 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞. This, they argued, could pave the way for less acrimonious dissolutions in similar situations.

More importantly, it urged a pragmatic approach when dealing with the tragic fallouts of love.

𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐬, 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐬, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐥𝐞𝐝𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡.

One day is not enough to appreciate you!

Catch the best moments from our Mother's Day self-care session with our expert Geet Kaur!

Exercise your power to choose.

Expectation v. reality

𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐝𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬.

Join us every Sunday for a 𝐅𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐖𝐞𝐞𝐤𝐥𝐲 𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐋𝐚𝐰 𝐋𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 led by BEERTA BAJWA (Advocate, Bombay High Court) on the LawSikho Youtube Channel.

This week’s topic (📆 May 5th @11:30 AM IST): 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐝𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐎𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐩 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡:

👉 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐀𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐮𝐞𝐬: Understand the procedures for challenging adverse orders, including appeals, revisions, and writ petitions

👉 𝐈𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐆𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐬: Learn how to identify strong grounds for challenging adverse orders

👉 𝐍𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬: Gain insights into the appellate process and how to effectively navigate it

𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞!

✔️ This session is a must for legal professionals representing clients and individuals seeking justice in the face of adverse orders in criminal matters.

𝐃𝐨𝐧'𝐭 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬 𝐨𝐮𝐭!

🔗 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMvIDrB6NY4

Friday flashbacks!