Posts

The Hon'ble High Court of Karnatka Quashes Interim Maintenance Under DV Act for Wife Earning More Than Husband : No Automatic Maintenance for Financially Independent Wives: Karnataka High Court Sets the Record Straight ; Income Disparity and Maintenance: Why Earning Wives Can't Automatically Claim Relief Under the DV Act

-
2. Case Details Case Name: Writ Petition No.2327 of 2026 (GM-FC) Court: High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru Date of Judgment: 18th June, 2026 Presiding Judge: Hon'ble Dr. Justice Chillakur Sumalatha 3. Brief Facts The respondent-wife filed an application invoking Sections 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDA) . She sought various forms of relief, including interim maintenance of ₹1,13,515 per month, accommodation, and ₹50,000 for litigation charges . The Trial Court (Judicial Magistrate First Class, III Court, Mysuru) directed the petitioner-husband to pay an interim maintenance of ₹20,000 per month . Aggrieved by this directive, the husband filed a Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India . The petitioner produced evidence, including a pay slip, showing his gross monthly salary was ₹63,346 (with a net pay of ₹60,009) . Conversely, the respondent-wife admitted in her assets and liabilities af...
Post a Comment
Read more

Decoding Section 63(4) of BSA, 2023: Supreme Court Settles the Controversy on Hash Values and Expert Certificates in Pune Bar Association v. UOI : Electronic Evidence under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam: Why the Supreme Court Upheld Section 63(4) and Redefined "Expert" Criteria : The Digital Fingerprint of Law: Supreme Court's Landmark Clarification on Hash Values, Expert Signatures, and BSA Section 63(4)

-
1. Introduction The transition from the old Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to the newly enacted Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), has triggered intense academic and courtroom debates . At the absolute center of this legal shift is Section 63(4) of the BSA , which introduces rigorous statutory prerequisites for admitting secondary electronic records into evidence . In a significant order passed by a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in Pune Bar Association v. Union of India and Others (2026) , the apex court evaluated the constitutional validity of this stringent new regime . The petitioner challenged the mandatory requirements of disclosing "hash values" and procuring expert signatures, calling them "manifestly arbitrary" and excessively burdensome for ordinary litigants . This landmark judgment clears the air on electronic evidence authentication, providing essential clarity for contemporary litigation, future judicial exams, and technological ad...
Post a Comment
Read more