OTHER SIDE OF THE DOWRY CASE: HARASSED HUSBAND

Sadashiv Vaidya is a private man. However, since his acquittal in a dowry harassment case led by his wife three years ago, the 48-year-old electrical engineer has decided to make his private hell public.
In the coming weeks, he and his two children will recount their story on national television in UAE, where they live.

READ  Rapist file rape case

One thought on “OTHER SIDE OF THE DOWRY CASE: HARASSED HUSBAND

  1. SHE DEMANDED RS. 100 LAKHS BUT SETTLED FOR 6 LAKHS.

    She is a Lawyer enrolled with Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa.
    She is presently working as claims officer in some Shipping Co;Dubai UAE and residing in Sharjah. Her father is also Lawyer practising in Mumbai High Court.

    Father/Daughter duo contested divorce matter in US Court and demanded
    Rs. One Crore only as settlement. The divorce was granted without any
    payment or alimony in view of prenuptial agreement entered into between
    the parties. Daughter/Father duo were named blackmailers and extortionists
    in the proceedings in.

    When she realised that, she can not stop divorce decree against her in USA
    and that she was not likely to get any amount of money or property in settlement,
    she resorted to the misuse of police machinery in India, with oblique motives
    misusing section 498A of Indian Penal code without the competent legal and
    territorial Jurisdiction by making false and fraudulent presentations, uppressing
    and concealing the evidence.

    The above matter pending in Indian courts for five years was mutually settled between them
    as under:-

    1. He agreed to pay Rs.6 Lakhs to Her by way of full and final settlement to put an end to
    all disputes and differences between them.

    2. She ensured that the proceeding arising out of C.R. No. 405/02 of Police Station shall be

    closed and shall cooperate through her Advocate in order to ensure that the proceedings

    are closed/dropped/put an end to in respect of the said the C.R..

    3. Pursuant to these Consent Terms, there were no claims whatsoever from the side of either

    of the parties against each other.

    4. It was agreed that all complaints/applications/proceedings against either of the parties will be

    withdrawn/put an end to and none of the parties will resort to any litigation either in India or

    United States of America or any other part of the world arising out of the present dispute in future.

    5. It was agreed that she was married and subsequently divorced on 1st April, 2003 by the Superior

    Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Middlesex County, Family Part Docket

    No: FM-12-0292-03F.

    6. It was clarified that the marriage between the parties was dissolved and not in subsistence.

    Both parties had no claim and grievances of any whatsoever against one another and were

    free to get re-married, if they so desire.

    7. It was agreed by and between the parties that the entire disputes between the parties and their families

    and all others involved whether directly or indirectly out of the matrimonial dispute between parties were

    settled and no further proceedings shall be initiated in any court of Law/forum out of the same whether

    Civil/Criminal or otherwise or out of the present consent terms contents thereof which were agreed by

    both parties to be challenged in any court/forum by way of appeal/revision/otherwise.

    These consent terms are entered in to voluntarily by the parties.

    The case was Quashed by Mumbai High Court and order is as under:-
    http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/data/crim … 020708.pdf

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

    CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

    CRI. APPLICATION NO. 1199 OF 2008

    Dinesh Gope Lalwani & anr. … Applicants

    v/s

    The State of Maharashtra & anr. … Respondents

    Mr.Sudeep Pasbola for the applicants.

    Mrs.A.A.Mane, A.P.P. for the respondent No.1 State.

    Mr.A.H.H.Ponda for the respondent No.2.

    CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.

    DATED: 2ND JULY, 2008

    1. The application has been filed for quashing the

    proceedings in Criminal Case No.631/P/2003 pending

    before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 15th Court, Mazgaon,

    Mumbai, arising out of F.I.R. No.405 of 2002 registered

    with the Nagpada Police Station.

    2. The application has been filed under Section 482 of

    the Code of Criminal Procedure.

    3. The F.I.R. was lodged by tyhe respondent No.2

    against applicant Nos.1 and 2 for offences punishable

    under Sections 498-A and 406 of the I.P.C. The

    respondent No.2 was married to applicant No.1. Their

    marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce.

    Consent terms were arrived at by the parties which have

    been filed before the Sessions Court at Sewree in

    Criminal Revision Application No.6 of 2005.

    4. An affidavit has been filed in this Court by

    respondent No.2 who is present today in Court, wherein

    she has averred that she has no objection to the

    proceedings arising out of the aforesaid criminal case

    been quashed.

    5. In view of the fact that the parties to the dispute

    have settled their differences and the respondent No.2

    does not wish to prosecute the complaint, it would be

    futile to continue with the proceedings in the criminal

    Court. The differences between the applicants and the

    respondent No.2 were essentially personal in nature.

    In view of the fact that the marriage is dissolved and

    consent terms have been arrived at, the criminal

    proceedings, in my opinion, should be quashed. I am

    fortified with the view taken in the judgement of the

    Supreme Court in the case of B.S.Joshi & ors. v/s State

    of Haryana & anr. reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 1386.

    The Court says, ” The differences between parties were
    essentially personal in nature”. The Court has clearly given opinion that,
    “The criminal proceedings were Misuse of Police and Judicial machinery
    and the case was essentially personal”.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *