[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

It is not possible to understand your question. Please make your question clear.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

“Admitted” would imply that the High Court has accepted your case for a detailed hearing on the basis of the merits of case. If the case is found unfit for hearing due to various reasons (such as no jurisdiction, frivolous case, etc.), the court may dismiss it at the initial stage itself, instead of “admitting” it. “Regular hearing” would imply that it would be heard on merits in detail.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

For Mr. Hari: If you cannot properly answer the question raised, you are requested please not to interrupt unnecessarily. Everyone has his or her own problem, which is dear to him / her. We cannot and should not scold persons (instead of answering their legal queries) seeking some help from this Forum. This Forum is meant to help the people with whatever little legal help can possibly be given and not to question their motives or for cross-fighting. Please refrain from doing so in future, otherwise we shall be left with no option but to block you. Yes, of course, if you have legal expertise and can help people, you are welcome. In the past, we have answered your queries also without questioning your motive. In fact, today itself, you appear to have asked a new question in this Forum. My respectful and humble request to you would be to make use of your time to get answers to your own questions.

For Ms. Rohini Bakshi: The solution to the legal issue raised by you lies in sub-section (3) of Section 125 of Cr.P.C., which is reproduced below:

“(3) If any person so ordered fails without sufficient cause to comply with the order, any such Magistrate may, for every breach of the order, issue a warrant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines, and may sentence such person, for the whole or any part of each month’s allowance for the maintenance or the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be, remaining unpaid after the execution of the warrant, to imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made:

Provided that no warrant shall be issued for the recovery of any amount due under this section unless application be made to the Court to levy such amount within a period of one year from the date on which it became due:

Provided further that if such person offers to maintain his wife on condition of her living with him, and she refuses to live with him, such Magistrate may consider any grounds of refusal stated by her, and may make an order under this section notwithstanding such offer, if he is satisfied that there is just ground for so doing.

Explanation.—If a husband has contracted marriage with another woman or keeps a mistress, it shall be considered to be just ground for his wife’s refusal to live with him.”

Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of Section 125(3) of Cr.P.C., you have to move an application before the court (within one year of the amount of maintenance becoming due) for recovery of the maintenance amount. The court has the power to issue warrant against your husband and recover the amount in the manner provided for levying fines. The court also has the power to sentence your husband to imprisonment for the term mentioned in the above sub-section if the amount cannot be recovered. So, please make use of these provisions if you are forced to do so.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

The power to transfer a criminal case from one state to another is with the Supreme Court under Section 406 of Cr.P.C., which is reproduced below:

“406. Power of Supreme Court to transfer cases and appeals.— (1) Whenever it is made to appear to the Supreme Court that an order under this section is expedient for the ends of justice, it may direct that any particular case or appeal be transferred from one High Court to another High Court or from a Criminal Court subordinate to one High Court to another Criminal Court of equal or superior jurisdiction subordinate to another High Court.

(2) The Supreme Court may act under this section only on the application of the Attorney-General of India or of a party interested, and every such application shall be made by motion, which shall, except when the applicant is the Attorney-General of India or the Advocate-General of the State, be supported by affidavit or affirmation.

(3) Where any application for the exercise of the powers conferred by this section is dismissed, the Supreme Court may, if it is of opinion that the application was frivolous or vexatious, order the applicant to pay by way of compensation to any person who has opposed the application such sum not exceeding one thousand rupees as it may consider appropriate in the circumstances of the case.”

It is a sort of discretionary power and can be exercised on varied grounds in the interest of justice. The words “expedient for the ends of justice” used in the section are so wide that they can cover almost everything which leads to some sort of injustice or genuine hardship, etc. But, it is not sure whether or not the Supreme Court would exercise its discretionary power to transfer the case in your situation (on grounds of hardships of family members due to workplace). You have to explain as to what is the hardship being caused to you, given that the distance between the two places is not much. Moreover, it appears that you had yourself filed the complaint / FIR at the place from where you want to now get the case transferred. However, I may hasten to add that it is generally noticed that the Supreme Court is quite sympathetic to the cause of women in the matter of transfer of cases from one state to another.

Another solution to your problem could be like this. Since you are the complainant in the case and not an accused, you need not remain present on every date of the case (more so if it is a case investigated and charge sheeted by police, and not a private complaint case). You can ask for exemption from personal appearance in the case. Only when your own examination is required to be conducted in the court, you need to be present. On other dates, you may be exempted from appearance. Even otherwise, if it is a case investigated and charge sheeted by police, such case is supposed to prosecuted by the “State” and not by the complainant. So, consider seeking exemption from personal appearance. This may perhaps solve your problem.

Also see this article (which is related to your issue): Transfer of criminal case or appeal by Supreme Court from one court to another in India.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

If you want to apply for cancellation of bail (which generally implies that there is some development after the grant of bail, such as destroying evidence, threatening witnesses, etc.), instead of setting aside of the bail order (which will also ultimately lead to cancellation of bail), then you may consider approaching the Sessions Court under Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. Please consult your lawyer, who would be the best person to advise you in the matter since he would have seen the detailed papers of your case. This is so because the opinion given here is only of a general nature, having been given without knowing the full details of the case.     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

As per the provisions of Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, it is specifically laid down that the custody of a minor who has not completed the age of 5 years shall ordinarily be with the mother. The relevant extract from this section is as under:

“6. Natural guardians of a Hindu minor.—The natural guardians of a Hindu minor, in respect of the minor’s person as well as in respect of the minor’s property (excluding his or her undivided interest in joint family property), are—

(a) in the case of a boy or an unmarried girl—the father, and after him, the mother : Provided that the custody of a minor who has not completed the age of five years shall ordinarily be with the mother; …”.

Interpreting this section, recently, in the case of Roxann Sharma v. Arun Sharma, (2015) 8 SCC 318, the Supreme Court held as under:

“Section 6 of the HMG Act [Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act] is of seminal importance. It reiterates Section 4(b) and again clarifies that guardianship covers both the person as well as the property of the minor; and then controversially states that the father and after him the mother shall be the natural guardian of a Hindu. Having said so, it immediately provides that the custody of a minor who has not completed the age of 5 years shall ordinarily be with the mother. The significance and amplitude of the proviso has been fully clarified by the decisions of this Court and very briefly stated, a proviso is in the nature of an exception to what has earlier been generally prescribed. The use of the word “ordinarily” cannot be overemphasised. It ordains a presumption, albeit a rebuttable one, in favour of the mother. The learned Single Judge appears to have lost sight of the significance of the use of the word “ordinarily” inasmuch as he has observed in para 13 of the impugned order that the Mother has not established her suitability to be granted interim custody of Thalbir who at that point in time was an infant. The proviso places the onus on the father to prove that it is not in the welfare of the infant child to be placed in the custody of his/her mother. The wisdom of Parliament or the legislature should not be trifled away by a curial interpretation which virtually nullifies the spirit of the enactment.”

“The HMG Act postulates that the custody of an infant or a tender aged child should be given to his/her mother unless the father discloses cogent reasons that are indicative of and presage the likelihood of the welfare and interest of the child being undermined or jeopardised if the custody is retained by the mother. Section 6(a) of the HMG Act, therefore, preserves the right of the father to be the guardian of the property of the minor child but not the guardian of his person whilst the child is less than five years old. It carves out the exception of interim custody, in contradistinction of guardianship, and then specifies that custody should be given to the mother so long as the child is below five years in age. We must immediately clarify that this section or for that matter any other provision including those contained in the G and W Act [Guardians and Wards Act, 1890], does not disqualify the mother to custody of the child even after the latter’s crossing the age of five years.”

From the above, it should be clear that the custody of a minor child of age less than 5 years is required to be given to the mother, except in some exceptional situations. Moreover, the Supreme Court has clarified that even after the age of 5 years, the custody of minor can be given to mother and she is not disqualified in this regard.

In view of the above, since your son is only 3 years old, you have the right to seek custody of your son in case you apply for divorce. Ordinarily, the custody of this minor son will be given to you in your capacity as mother. If needed, you can file an application under the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, for getting custody of the child. If needed, you can also seek an interlocutory order under Section 12 of the Guardians and Wards Act for temporary custody of your son during pendency of the above application. Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is also relevant in this regard for passing interim orders during pendency of the divorce petition relating to custody and maintenance of children.

The answer to your question is that you can definitely seek maintenance for your minor son from your husband. Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. enables that. Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is relevant for this purpose also (for maintenance of children).

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

No doubt, order granting bail is an interlocutory order, which is not subject to revision under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. It is noteworthy that in the case of Amar Nath v. State of Haryana, (1977) 4 SCC 137 at p. 142 : AIR 1977 SC 2185 : 1977 Cri LJ 1891 [also see, Ram Naresh Singh v. State of M.P., 1995 Cri LJ 2523 at p. 2524 (MP)], it was inter alia observed by the Supreme Court, while giving examples of interlocutory orders, that passing orders for bail may no doubt amount to interlocutory orders against which no revision would lie under Section 397(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

However, you can always file a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the high court for setting aside the order of bail, if it is erroneous or illegal, etc.

It has been held by Gujarat high court in the case of Bhikhaji Chaturji Thakore v. State of Gujarat, 2007 Cri LJ 3433 at p. 3439 (Guj), that the bail can also be cancelled on the ground that the order granting bail is casual in approach, capricious and arbitrary in nature and cavalier in the reasoning, it sans reasons, it is perverse, it ignores the evidence which is available on the record or the Court failed to apply appropriate law while granting the bail.

Please also note that, as held by the Supreme Court in the case of Puran v. Rambilas, AIR 2001 SC 2023 at p. 2026 : 2001 Cri LJ 2566 : (2001) 6 SCC 338, the concept of setting aside the unjustified, illegal or perverse order granting bail is totally different from the concept of cancelling the bail on the ground that accused has misconducted himself or because of some new facts requiring such cancellation.

In your case, on the basis of the facts mentioned by you, you’ll have to challenge the bail order for setting it aside on the grounds of it being perverse and arbitrary, among other grounds.

[Note: Judgments quoted in the reply are taken from my book Law of Bail, Bonds, Arrest and Custody (2009 Edition), appx. 1625 pages, published by LexisNexis Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur, New Delhi (ISBN: 978-81-8038-440-0).]

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Generally speaking, recording clandestine video may be violation of privacy. In fact, even CCTV at public places may perhaps be invasion of privacy. In such cases, at least, a public notice needs to be displayed informing that “You are under CCTV watch” or something similar. I am not aware of any law that permits CCTV. Even public authorities (such as police) use CCTV. Video recording a meeting without knowledge or consent of other participants may also perhaps be violation of privacy. Sting operations conducted by media and private persons also come in this category. There may also be a rival claim in some situations. For example, if I use CCTV in my office, I may claim that it is my property and I have every right to do it within my premises. But, at the same time, it is generally desirable that a notice needs to be put so that nobody is taken by surprise.

It is pertinent to point out that in the case of “Court on its Own Motion v. State & Ors.”, 2009 Cri LJ 677, the Delhi High Court had observed that a sting operation by a private person or agency is, by and large, unpalatable or unacceptable in a civilized society, and that normally, if a private person or agency unilaterally conducts a sting operation, it would be violating the privacy of another person and would make itself liable for action at law.

However, sometimes the courts give more importance to public interest against the right to privacy. In Court on its Own Motion v. State, 146 (2008) DLT 429, it was held by Delhi high court that: “Sting operations showing acts and facts as they are truly and actually happening may be necessary in public interest and as a tool for justice, but a hidden camera cannot be allowed to depict something which is not true, correct and is not happening but has happened because of inducement by entrapping a person.”

It may also be relevant to point out that Indian Broadcasting Foundation’s Content Code & Certification Rules 2011 prohibit the broadcast of certain private information unless the invasion of privacy is warranted in the “identifiable larger public interest”.

In brief, law on these issues in not well established and is not clear. There is no legislation on these issues. But, generally, it appears that where larger public interest overweighs the privacy concerns, such video recording can be done, e.g., CCTV at public places.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

I have already mentioned that there cannot be two FIRs in the same matter, which has arisen out of the same cause of action. Therefore, it may not be possible to file a separate complaint against the left-out accused persons after filing of charge sheet also. But, you can always move the court against dropping of their names from the charge sheet and/or also for inclusion of names of new accused persons, provided you have evidence to support the same.

Nobody can stop you from getting medically examined yourself and submitting the report to the police.

If the police is removing certain sections, you can try to convince the court at the time of charge framing, etc., though the role of the complainant (or her advocate) is limited during trial when the trial is based on police investigation. Alternatively, you may have to challenge the investigation, may be, before the high court.

When the police submits closure report after completion of investigation, the court has the power to reject the closure report and take direct cognizance against accused persons. This power is available with the Magistrate under Section 190 read with Section 173 of Cr.P.C. In the case of a closure report, the complainant is given a chance to oppose it. Likewise, if some persons are named as accused in the FIR, but their names are dropped from the charge sheet, the Magistrate can still take cognizance against them if there is sufficient evidence against them.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Recording telephone conversations can basically be of three types:

(1) Conversation is recorded with consent of both parties to the conversation.

(2) Conversion is recorded by one party without the consent of the second party to the conversation.

(3) Conversation is recorded by a third party without the consent of both parties to the conversation.

Law is not fully clear on recording of telephone conversations. There is no specific legal provision that permits recording of such conversations, except interception of phone conversations by or under orders of the authority empowered to do so under Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act, 1885, and/or under Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. However, these provisions basically cover recording of conversations in the third category mentioned above, where an official agency (such as a police agency) with specific orders of the competent authority intercepts and records the conversations of third parties.

There is no specific legal provision permitting recording of conversations in the first two categories mentioned above. At the same time, there does not appear to be a specific bar also. Of course, there are privacy issues when you record the conversation of another person. Please note that right to privacy has been recognized as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

With these caveats in place, let’s discuss the three categories described above.

In the first category, since both parties are consenting to recording of their own conversation, there should not be any privacy concern. The intention may be to keep record. It is like preparing minutes of a meeting. There may not be anything illegal in such recording.

In the second category, one party is unilaterally recording the telephone conversation without the knowledge and consent of the other party to the conversation. This may have privacy concerns of the second party. There may not be any specific legal provision authorizing such recording. At the same time, there does not appear to be a specific legal bar if one records one’s own conversation with another person, without eavesdropping on any third party or without implanting any spy gadgets on the phone device of the other party or without hacking into any outside network. It is like a photograph of an event which is used in future to refresh the memory. Once the second party is talking to you on phone, it is quite obvious that you would know what is spoken by him. In fact, this is the very purpose of conversation. Now, you can remember that conversation in your memory, and most people will in fact remember, though not fully or verbatim. You can also prepare written notes of the conversation subsequently, though again the same may not be verbatim. By recording the conversation, what you are doing is to record it verbatim and fully. Such conversation belongs to both parties. It is as much yours as it is of the second party. Therefore, the law must not come in the way of your recording your own conversation with another person, if it is done in a bona fide manner to protect your own interests in future by keeping a record thereof, and not for any other ulterior purpose such as defamation or blackmail. However, this conversation should not be recorded with the help of a third party, who gets knowledge of the conversation since in that case the privacy issue may become relevant. Likewise, you should not make the conversation available to third parties, in order to take care of the privacy concerns. However, if needed in future, producing the conversation before a court or a tribunal or some other legal authority would be a different matter if such production is to defend your own rights vis-à-vis the other party to the conversation (this is similar to other private documents being produced in courts when one has to defend oneself). It appears that your question related to this second category.

In the third category, recording of phone conversations is illegal, except where it is done by or under orders of the authority empowered to do so under Section 5(2) of the Telegraph Act, 1885, and/or under Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Such recording cannot be done by private persons. For example, in the case of Rayala M. Bhuvaneswari v. Nagaphanender Rayala, AIR 2008 AP 98, 2008 (2) ALD 311, 2008 (1) ALT 613, the Andhra Pradesh high court held that recording by a husband of the conversation of his wife with others (such as her parents) was illegal and it infringed the right of privacy of the wife.

It may not be out of place to point out that secretly recorded telephone conversations have been allowed to be admitted in evidence, subject to certain safeguards, in certain cases decided by the Supreme Court, starting with the case of R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra, (1973) 1 SCC 471 : AIR 1973 SC 157 : 1973 Cri LJ 228.

Since the law does not specifically permit recording of phone conversations, my opinion should not be construed as an advice to record the phone conversations. I have merely tried to explain the legal position in a pro bono manner. Though I believe my opinion reflects the correct legal position, it may not necessarily be so in view of the fact that the law on these issues in unclear and the courts may take a different opinion. Therefore, you should do it at your own risk.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

What I had mentioned earlier was due to the reason that once a regular promotion has been granted, then demoting that person would amount to a penalty for which an inquiry is necessary. However, if the promotion is adhoc or temporary subject to confirmation, then no such departmental inquiry may not be necessary.      

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

It appears that the investigation is still going on and the charge sheet is yet to be filed. Moreover, it has been mentioned by you that in the FIR the names of other relatives were mentioned as accused, though you have mentioned that the police is trying to save these relatives. Legally speaking, there can be only one FIR in a particular matter (i.e., for one cause of action). Since you have already filed one FIR, the Magistrate will not accept another complaint (such as a private complaint) in the same matter against some individuals, irrespective of whether or not there names are already included in the first FIR. Secondly, the Magistrate has correctly informed that after filing of the charge sheet, if some of the accused persons are found to be not charge sheeted, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. can be filed to include their names as accused persons and such application can then be decided on merits.

You may try to give all your evidence to the police (including recorded evidence) by some method which can show in future that you had in fact provided such evidence. For example, you can send the written information (of the evidence) by a registered letter with CD recording, etc., or you can send soft copies by email. If the IO does some mischief, then such proof can help you in future.

In addition, you can meet the senior officers of police and see if they can help you. In the worst situation, if you have proof that the I.O. is doing mischief, you can approach the high court (which has sufficient powers in this regard) for transfer of the case to CID or some other officer of the same district / city police. This can be done during investigation stage itself. Other (lower) courts may not be in a position to give directions to police during investigation stage. Of course, after investigation is over, the trial court will also get certain powers to directly take cognizance even against those accused persons who have not been charge sheeted by police.

Yes, stridhan includes all the items (such as gifts, jewellery, money, property, etc.) given to you by your family as well as items given by your husband’s family.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

One of the conditions mentioned in Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, that deals with “Divorce by mutual consent”, is that the husband and wife have been living separately for a period of one year or more. Therefore, it is an essential condition and is required to be fulfilled for filing a case of divorce by mutual consent.

No specific type of evidence is prescribed under law to prove this fact. As per the Evidence Act, evidence can be in the form of oral evidence or documentary evidence. You can provide any proof that should be acceptable and reliable to prove this fact of living separately for one year or more. For example, if possible, you can give your separate address proofs. In fact, generally, a mere mention in the petition of the fact that you have been living separately may also be sufficient.
     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) governs the custody of an accused person during the investigation of a case. On the other hand, provisions relating to custody of accused under Section 309(2) of Cr.P.C. come into play “…after taking cognizance of an offence, or commencement of trial…”. Thus, Section 309(2) regulates the power of the court to grant custody of the accused after filing of charge sheet and after taking of cognizance of the offence. Therefore, these powers operate in different domains.

If the accused is in custody and the case is required to be adjourned during the trial stage or after taking cognizance of the case (which implies filing of charge sheet, if it is on the basis of a police investigation), then for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate can remand the accused to further custody (not exceeding 15 days at a time) under Section 309(2) of Cr.P.C.

Under Section 309 Cr.P.C., only judicial custody is permissible, whereas under Section 167 both – police custody and judicial custody – are permissible subject to time limits mentioned therein.

Once the trial has begun, Section 167 cannot be used (except, when further investigation is permitted). Section 309 Cr.P.C. is a section dealing with custody during trial. In addition, after filing of charge sheet, Section 209 Cr.P.C. can also be used for remanding accused to custody by the Magistrate (wherever it is relevant) who commits the case to the Sessions court if the case is exclusively triable by a Sessions court.

To see how the period of 15 days is to be computed, let’s see an example. If the further custody of 15 days is granted on, say, 8^th of a month, then the 15 days’ period will expire on 23^rd of the month.

     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Dr. Ashok Dhamija]

Yes. It should be permissible for you to seek information under RTI Act from another State / Central Government department or institution. In this regard, please also read the article: Can a Government employee submit RTI application relating to his service records?     

---

Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

[Author]

Posts