Best Divorce Lawyer Contact Number 8595722509

⚖️ Supreme Court on Women’s Right to Residence A significant observation by the Supreme Court reinforces that a woman cannot be thrown out of her matrimonial home just because of family disputes. 👩‍⚖️ The Court held: ✔️ A woman has the right to reside in a shared household ✔️ She cannot be evicted without due legal process ✔️ This right applies even if she has no ownership in the property 📌 However, the Court also clarified that this right is not absolute and reasonable conditions may be imposed in case of disputes. 💡 This judgment strengthens protections under the Domestic Violence Act and ensures dignity and security for women in matrimonial homes. 👨‍⚖️ Need Legal Help in Divorce or Domestic Violence Case? Advocate Devashish Maharishi |  Best Divorce & Family Case Lawyer in Karkardooma Court, Delhi  ✔️ Divorce (Mutual & Contested) ✔️ Domestic Violence Cases ✔️ Maintenance & Alimony ✔️ Child Custody Matters ✔️ CAW Cell Complaints Maintenance & Alimony C...

Jharkhand High Court Grants Divorce Over Digital Cruelty & Character Assassination  ⚖️ Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi  In a landmark judgment, the Jharkhand High Court granted divorce to a woman who faced mental cruelty and humiliation after her husband illegally accessed and shared her private photographs from Google Drive with his family. The Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Arun Kumar Rai held that sharing such “objectionable” photos and allowing humiliation by in-laws amounts to character assassination and marital cruelty. 🔹 Court recognizes  digital privacy violation 🔹 Sharing private photos =  mental cruelty 🔹 Strong message against character shaming of women 🔹 Important precedent in Indian matrimonial law Top lawyer for Contested Divorce case, Restitution of Conjugal Rights, Domestic violence case, CAW cell Complaint case, Quashing petition and for Mutual Consent Divorce case...

✅ Best Divorce Case Lawyer in Delhi | Advocate Devashish Maharishi Trusted Advocate for Divorce case, Domestic Violence case, Maintenance & Alimony case & NRI Mutual Consent Divorce case & other Family Disputes – Karkardooma Court, Delhi ⚖️ Real Judgment. Real Impact. Your Legal Rights Protected. In a landmark judgment, the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) reaffirmed that a woman’s right to reside in a shared household is not dependent on her actual residence in it. This crucial decision strengthens women's rights under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 , particularly under Section 17(1) . 📌 Key Takeaway from the Judgment (ABC v. XYZ & Anr. – Neutral Citation: 2025:BHC-NAG:9202): “The right to reside in the shared household is a legal right, enforceable by a woman in a domestic relationship – regardless of whether she actually resided there in the past or not.” – Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke, Bombay High Court 🔍 Legal Analysis of...

Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi Advocate Devashish Maharishi | Best divorce case lawyer in karkardooma Court Delhi Veerpal Kaur v. State of Punjab, CRWP No. 6232 of 2025, decided on 27-8-2025 Punjab and Haryana High Court: In a petition, filed by the petitioner(‘mother’), under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution to direct the respondent(‘father’) to hand over the custody of their 4-year-old child, a Single Judge Bench of Sumeet Goel J., while dismissing the petition held that the writ of Habeas Corpus was not a substitute for meticulous and evidence-based determination of custody dispute and was not to be utilized as a subterfuge to circumvent the proper statutory forums and its exerci...

Recently, the Delhi High Court declined to suspend the interim visitation rights between a minor son and his mother and sister in an ongoing custody dispute. The Court underscored that continued interaction was necessary for nurturing family bonds and observed that suspending visitation at this stage would not serve the welfare of the children. The case arises from a matrimonial dispute where custody of two children is contested between their parents. Earlier, the Family Court granted interim custody of both children to the mother, with visitation rights for the father. While the daughter has since chosen to reside with her mother, the younger son continues to stay with his father. The High Court had previously structured an arrangement to facilitate regular interaction between the children and their mother. The father moved an application seeking suspension of the visitation arrangement, alleging that the son felt uncomfortable and emotionally disturbed after interacting with his moth...

X v. State of West Bengal, CRR 2610 of 2019, decided on 28-07-2025. Calcutta High Court: The petitioner approached the Court seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from an FIR lodged over alleged workplace harassment, which had resulted in a chargesheet under Section 509 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). The allegations pertained to incidents between 2016-2017, reported over a year after the complainant’s resignation. A Single Judge Bench of Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J., while allowing the petition, held that only using the words “harassed” or “abused”, did not demonstrate the requisite intention or knowledge which could lead to the conclusion that any alleged act of the petitioner constituted an insult to the complainant’s modesty. The Court emphasised that mere harassment at workplace or abusing her at workplace might not constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC, unless essential ingredients were fulfilled.  Decision: The Court examined the ingredients to constitute an of...

Case Title: ARP vs State of Maharashtra (Criminal Application 900 of 2025) The Bombay High Court recently while quashing a section 498A IPC case against a family observed that marital discords have now-a-days become a menace in the society and that because of the two persons fighting over petty issues, the concept of marriage, which is 'sacrosanct' for Hindus is suffering a setback. A division bench of Justices Nitin Sambre and Mahendra Nerlikar noted the 'trend' of women filing FIR against as many relatives of the husband as possible and said thus there is a need to look at matrimonial discord matters from a 'different' angle. "Needless to mention that considering the recent trend of filing first information reports against as many as persons from husband side, has become imperative to look the matters of matrimonial disputes from a different angle, and therefore, if the parties settle their disputes amicably in order to live peacefully, it is the duty of ...