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.
We are Not Lawyers but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do
Please to read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE
We handle Women centric biased laws like False 498A, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307,312, 313,323 376, 377, 406, 420, 506, 509; and also TEP, RTI etc
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withdrawn/put an end to and none of the parties will resort to any litigation either in India or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”.