There has been a long-standing custom among Jewish people to study Perke Avot, Ethics of the Fathers, during the period between Passover and Shavuot, which is the holiday that comes seven weeks after Passover, commemorating the revelation of the Torah at Mount Sinai. Some people continue studying this little beautiful book of ethical teachings and aphorisms. Past Shavuot, all the way until Rosh Hashanah. And the last Mishnah, the last teaching in the first chapter of Perke Avot, Ethics or Chapters of the Fathers, Rabban Shimon Bengamliel teaches that the world endures. The world exists. The world is able to endure and exist on account of three things. There are three things that are necessary for our world to be able to endure and exist. MS Din Vashalom, Truth, Justice and Peace. Truth, Justice and Peace. And according to the commentary of the Yavats, peace is listed last because without it the other two would be worthless. Similarly, in our daily prayers, it's a Jewish practice to pray three times a day. Our prayer is called the Amida, the standing meditation. It's sometimes called the Shmone Esra, the 18, which is a misnomer because now there are 19 blessings in our prayer. It includes vital requests for our personal and national needs. But the very last blessing is one for peace. Because without peace, all the other blessings are not of any value or are of very little value. This idea is echoed in the very last teaching of the entire Talmud. The Talmud is a huge body of Jewish teaching. And the very last Mishnah, the very last teaching of the entire Talmud in a book called Uqtsin, the third chapter, Rabbi Shimon Ben-Khalafta said, the Holy One blessed as He could not find a vessel that could hold Israel's blessings other than peace. As it says in Psalm chapter 29, verse 11, Adonai-e-Ozliyamo-Yitain, Adonai-yivorech-esamo-bashalom, that God will give might to His nation and God will bless His nation with peace. Peace is the ultimate vessel. It's a cleat, it's a vessel that is able to contain all the other blessings in life. And without this vessel of peace being intact, everything else can slip right through. Not only of course do we end our daily prayer, our daily prayer meditation with a blessing for peace, but each time we eat a meal and we say the Birkat Hamazon, the Grace After Meals, we end with the same verse from the book of Psalms that concludes the Talmud, God will give might to His nation and God will bless His nation with peace. And as well in the Birkat Kohanim, the priestly benediction, the priestly blessings that are found in the book of Numbers chapter 6, that in some communities, especially in Israel and in Svarda communities here in outside of Israel, this is said regularly in communities outside of Israel and Ashkenazda communities, it's said during the holidays, but the last of the three priestly blessings ends with a blessing for peace. And finally the well-known Qadish prayer, probably the most well-known prayer in the entire Jewish liturgy, ends by saying, may he who makes peace in his exalted realms, he should make peace upon us and upon all of Israel, etc. Now the end of the third book of the Torah, which is the book of Vayikra, Leviticus, which is the book that we're reading now, the end of the third book is a chapter called Bechukotai, and it begins by describing the rewards that we will receive for following the directives of the Torah, and after promising reign and crops, etc., verse 6 of chapter 27 says, I will provide peace in the land, and you will lie down with none to frighten you. And Rashi, the famous commentary writing about a thousand years ago in France says that by ending all the blessings here for following the ways of God with one for peace, Rashi says the Torah is teaching that peace is equivalent to all the other blessings combined. That's how great peace is. The Talmud in Tractai Gitan, page 59b, understands a verse in the book of Proverbs, in the book of Proverbs chapter 3 verse 17, it says, its ways are ways of pleasantness, and all of its pathways are peace. The Talmud understands that that passage in the book of Proverbs is referring to the Torah. And so the Talmud says that the entire Torah, everything in our Torah, is for the sake of peace. Everything that we're taught ultimately is for the sake of peace, of how to gain peace in our lives, how to gain peace in the world. The Midrash in Leviticus, Vayikur Araba chapter 9 teaches that one of God's names is peace, and it bases upon a verse in the book of Judges chapter 6 verse 24 where it speaks about an altar that's built, and part of the name is God is peace. I remember years ago when I first became a student at Yeshiva University, I purchased a doormat from my dorm room, and the doormat had the word Shalom written on it. And someone came over to me and said, well, it's not a good idea to have a doormat saying Shalom, because that's one of God's names, and you don't want to be stepping all over it. So that was the end of that doormat. I'm not sure how I promoted it. The Midrash also teaches in the book of the Midbar Numbers chapter 7 that our prophets, all the prophets in our Bible taught our people to care for nothing as much as caring for peace. Now we all know that the messianic hope, the great messianic hope of our Bible has one of its main components and elements, the promise of peace. The rabbi said in again Numbers, rabba chapter 11 that great is peace, seeing that when the Messiah king is to come, he will commence with peace. As it says in Isaiah chapter 52 verse 7, how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger of good tidings that announces peace. Hopefully, one day the United Nations in New York will actualize and even internalize the beautiful message that's emblazoned upon the Isaiah wall that stands on the street outside the General Assembly calling for all nations to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore. Unfortunately, as we all know, the United Nations has not been a great catalyst for world peace. Of course, the standard greeting that Jewish people use when greeting each other is either shalom or shalom aleichem, may you have peace. And peace, of course, is not simply an end, an absence of war and an absence of hostility. That's not what peace is all about. Shalom is related to the word shalem. We find this word in Genesis chapter 33 verse 18 after we know that Jacob had an incredibly difficult relationship with his brother Asav.  And after they meet, they embrace, they seem to come to some kind of peace between them. We're told that Jacob and Asav departed from each other and the Torah says that Jacob arrived shalem at the city of Shchem. He came shalem. Shalem means complete, whole. It means that your life is harmonious. All the areas complimenting each other, you're integrated, you're together. And so when we speak about shalom, we're talking about not just an absence of conflict, but we're talking about completeness, being together, being integrated, being harmonious. And when it comes to our relationships with other people, shalom is a state of harmony and cooperation. Now we know that our universe is characterized by a measure of disorder and entropy. At least that's what I learned when I was a student in high school. The Hebrew word for the heavens is shamaim. And it's said to be a combination of two components.  So when we say in our Qadish prayer, at the end of the Qadish, or ses shalom bim romav, that God makes peace in the upper exalted realms, the understanding is that this refers to bringing some cooperation to the cosmic manifestations of ash and mayim, of fire and water in shamaim in the heavens. And if shalom, if peace is from the word shalem, complete and perfect and whole, the opposite is a word called machloket. If shalom from shalem means whole and complete, the opposite is machloket, which means discord or dispute, and machloket comes from the Hebrew word chaelek, which means a part or a fragment. If peace is completeness, then the opposite is fragmentation. The Sfasemes, a great Hasidic teacher, maintains that machlokes, discord, is actually the natural state of mankind. Why? Because each one of us is different. We're individuals. We have separate identities. And we're very invested in our identities. We're very invested in who we are. We're invested in our differentness. And so the natural state of mankind is not harmony, is not togetherness, unless we make a tremendous effort to come together with other people who are often so different than we are. If we don't make that kind of effort, if we don't strive for that, then we will probably remain separate rather than moving closer together. The truth is that each one of us is a highly complex being and a bundle of contradictions and opposing qualities, each one of us within ourselves. And the truth is that we have to struggle to integrate ourselves and to keep ourselves whole. The task of becoming a whole person is not so easy, even within ourselves. Inner peace is an incredibly difficult thing to attain. And we've dealt with this in a previous lecture entitled .com that you can find on YouTube. Tonight, we'll be focusing on the area not of inner peace, but on interpersonal relationships and the goal of achieving shalom in our relationships. First, let's just say that there are numerous personal character traits that when cultivated facilitate living harmoniously with others. We're not going to have time to go into each of these tonight, but it's important to understand that in order to work on peace with others, a great deal of that means to develop who we are as individuals. With that, listing these in any particular order, number one, getting a life.  And probably one of the most critical qualities to cultivate within ourselves is having an inner joy and happiness. Because we are clear about who we are and the purpose of our lives, and we realize that our lives are short. And there are incredibly important things to achieve in life. And getting a life means that we are dedicated to pursuing the most important things in life. And as the Chazanish once said, that to a person living with a light of truth, there can be no sadness. Which means that if we are living our lives according to what we were meant to be doing, if we're pursuing what we should be doing in life, we will have joy and inner peace. Secondly, working on becoming a more patient and tolerant person. Tolerance is an incredibly important quality and value within Judaism. We have an entire lecture on the theme of tolerance also that you can find on YouTube. And just becoming someone who's patient with ourselves and with others is an incredibly important quality to work on. Thirdly, seeking to be a person who does kindness for others and to grow in our love and compassion for other people. Becoming people of love, becoming people of compassion. It's more difficult to get into tremendous quarrels with others when we want to be loving people and compassionate people. Fourth, striving to be people of humility. Learning that life is not about me. Now one of the most useful tools to employ is the Torah's directive to judge others favorably. It's one of the commandments in the Bible to judge other people favorably. So many quarrels would be nipped in the bud if we just got into the habit of always seeking to give other people the benefit of the doubt. There's a wonderful book that I recommend highly by Yehuda Samet called The Other Side of the Story. It's a book that's based upon a group of women in Jerusalem that meet or have met regularly for years. And what they would do each time they met was they would brainstorm over different personal struggles and quarrels and conflicts that they had in their lives. One was not invited to a wedding they expected to be invited to. Another one had a friend that dishonored them. I mean we each run into these occasions, into these instances so many times in our daily lives, small things, bigger things, from our friends, from our relatives, sometimes from strangers. And so this group of women got together and they would sit and they would try to help each other, judge the other person favorably. Maybe this was going on in their life. There's a wonderful story I once heard about a woman who was waiting for her flight at Ben-Gurion Airport in Israel. And she was munching on a pack of crackers when an elderly man came and sat down next to her right across from her on the small table. And she started to feel thirsty from the crackers so she got up to buy a drink somewhere in the lounge. And when she came back to her seat she was shocked to see this old man casually eating out of her box of crackers. Like it was his. And she says to herself, is he for real? I can't believe this. What an incredible chutzpah.  But he didn't. And after she put her hand in and took out a cracker, he did the same thing. He put his hand in and took out a cracker. She says to herself, he's got to be crazy. So again she reached in for a cracker and he did the same thing. And this continued back and forth until they reached the end of the box.  By this time she had enough. And she got up and started making her way over to the plane. She got on the plane and she was placing her bag in the overhead compartment and she opened it just to check for something. And she was shocked to see that in her carry-on bag was an opened box of crackers. She suddenly realized that when she got up to buy her drink, she placed the crackers in her own bag. And now she realized that she was the one who had been the uninvited guest eating the old man's crackers. It's so easy to judge people negatively and jump to the worst conclusions. About what someone did that we didn't think they should have done. Or what someone didn't do that we feel they should have done. This and that disappointment that we have routinely in life. So Artura says, try to see if it's possible to imagine that they may have had a reason for what they did. Or maybe they were in a very difficult or stressful situation. Or maybe this or maybe that. Don't we wish that other people were less judgmental of us? It says in Pirkei Avot, Ethics of the Fathers. Have they done at Kohlha Adam, the Kaffs-Russ, judged the entire person, the whole person, to the scale of merit. Meaning don't just condemn people or write them off because of a small disappointment. Because what about all the other good things they do? What about all the other great qualities they have? In the book of Exodus chapter 22 verse 30, the Torah says, People of holiness you shall be to me. You shall not eat the flesh of an animal that was torn in the field. To the dog you shall throw it. Now obviously in Torah law we cannot eat an animal, kosher animal unless it was slaughtered properly. So if an animal was mauled by a predator in the field, it was not slaughtered properly by a shochet, a ritual slaughterer, and we can't eat it. It's called a novella. And what do we do with that animal? So the Torah says you throw it to the dog. The wonderful commentary that Das Kahn in Ibali Atosvus says, It's very interesting when it says throw it to the dog. What dog is it referring to? And they suggest that it probably refers to the dog that was normally guarding your flock.   And usually your dog did a great job. It did a wonderful job. What does your dog normally get to eat? Not much.  Here, it sounds strange. Here the dog didn't do his job. Here the dog allowed a wolf or some other predator come in and maul one of your sheep. And now you're not going to be able to eat it. And what happens? You have to throw the carcass to the dog. The dog that let you down, the dog that didn't do its job. The dog that allowed this wolf to get into the flock and kill one of your herd. It's getting rewarded now at the very moment that it let you down. And the Dossacanum says yes. Because at this moment, you want to remember that you know what, this dog usually does a wonderful job for you. This dog usually takes care of your flock. This dog usually actually even risks its life to help you. And you don't usually reward it that much. You usually take it for granted. So now the Torah says thank it. Give it a beautiful meal. Give it the entire sheep or whatever was mauled. We got to judge people, the entire person. People are bigger and more than the thing that they did to hurt us or disappoint us. These character traits that I mentioned in these practices are like antibodies to fractured relationships. Of course sometimes we get into disagreements with others. We disagree about money, about business, about politics, about beliefs, about honor, about occurrences in life. But when these disputes get personal and they develop into a machloket, a division and people stop speaking to each other, this is a serious problem. My monotheist wrote to his son the following. Do not sully yourself with strife with machlokis that destroys the body, the soul and property, leaving nothing. I have seen the bright blackened. I've seen leaders diminished, families broken, princes demoted from their positions, large cities weakened, groups disbanded, pious people lost and trustworthy erased and honored people shamed and disgraced. All as a result of strife. Prophets prophesied, wise men shared their wisdom and philosophers explored and elaborated on the evils of strife and they all could not truly capture the extent of it. Thus I urge you, my son, to despise it and distance yourself from it and from all those who consider themselves its friends and supporters. The truth is that when we get involved with a dispute of other people, it can lead to many transgressions, many Torah prohibitions, including Lashon Harah, speaking evil, slandering others, the prohibition against taking revenge, the prohibition against bearing a grudge, the prohibition against hating your friend in your heart, the prohibition against saying hurtful words to people, and most seriously the prohibition against Khilal Hashem, disgracing and dishonoring God, among other transgressions. Now some people maintain that there's actually a general prohibition in the Torah against getting involved with quarrels and disputes. The classic example of a quarrel in the Torah is Korach's rebellion against Moses. Many people got involved in this fight and it doesn't end up well for any of them as we see in the book of Numbers chapter 16. In the aftermath of this debacle, the Torah warns in Numbers chapter 17 verse 5, do not be like Korach and his followers. And the Talmud and some commentaries say this is actually a Torah prohibition, not just something that was relevant back then, but it's a warning for all time we should not get involved with quarrels and disputes. Interestingly, arguing is a treasured and essential part of Judaism. Our sages call these arguments for the sake of heaven. Arguments for the sake of heaven are arguments in the pursuit of truth. An argument not for the sake of heaven is one in pursuit of victory. Rebbe Nachman of Breslov taught that an obsession with victory, with winning, prevents us from taking the other person seriously. Because it's all about me. It's all about my position. And it's all about me being right. And the other person therefore has to be wrong. That's what happens with an obsession with winning, with victory. The dispute between Moses and Korach is seen as the epitome of an argument not for the sake of heaven, not for the sake of truth. Korach and his cohorts never even attempt to confront Moses directly with their complaints. We don't see in the Torah anywhere where they actually come to Moses with their complaints. When Moses tried to have a dialogue with them, he was just rebuffed and insulted. They instead went behind Moses' back and spread all kinds of rumors and lies about him. The sages hold up the disputes of Hillel and Shamai as arguments for the sake of truth and for the sake of heaven. Those are good arguments. And even though they had fierce disputes, and if you enter any Talmudic study hall that happens today, the arguing can be fierce. But it didn't get personal. And the Talmud says that the students of Hillel and Shamai loved each other, married each other. They never broke their relationships. Now Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, the former chief rabbi of England, sees in the nature of our sages' disputations with each other a model for healthy conflict resolution. And this includes, he says, number one, respecting the other point of view, even when disagreeing. Even when we disagree, do it in a respectful way. Number two, listening actively to the other point of view and trying deeply to understand their position. Try to understand the person we're disagreeing with. Number three, never use force. Meaning not even psychological force or intimidation, only logic and persuasion. Number four, be open to the outcome, because you may be proven wrong. My friend who was a student of Rabbi Solovecic, one of the great Talmudic sages in the past century, said that there were more than one time where he would give a lecture that went on for hours. And a student would ask a question and sometimes Rabbi Solovecic would come back the next day and say, take yesterday's class and throw it out. A class, a lecture that he worked on for hours and hours and hours, he was not going to fudge. He was not going to do anything it took to buttress a weak point. Number five, see disagreement, not just as conflict, but as a collaborative activity in the pursuit of truth. Too often our disputes today are fights, that's all they are. They're fights and we have to win. Rabbi Sack says, no, we have to see our disagreements with others as a collaborative activity in pursuit of the truth, wherever it leads. Next Rabbi Sack says we should accept this process as a holy part of life, as a beautiful part of life. And finally keep talking to each other, even though your opponents, even though you disagree, you can and should love each other. What an incredibly refreshing perspective this is, especially after what has become of contemporary political discourse and social media nastiness. The ranker that takes place in our world today is the most unhealthy kind of disputing and arguing. Not what we would call disputing for the sake of heaven. Now the preferred way to settle disputes and arguments and disagreements in life is to seek peace by negotiating and compromising. When each side insists on being right and refuses to budge, compromise is impossible. The Torah however teaches that sometimes truth needs to be compromised in order to achieve peace. Sometimes we have conflicting values in life. Truth is an ultimate value. But peace is considered to be an even more ultimate value. And so even though we do everything to achieve truth in life, sometimes the Torah teaches you have to fudge the truth in order to achieve peace. Compromise is fudging the truth because the truth is one of these people is probably right and the other one is probably wrong. But the Torah wants to have a win-win situation. And a win-win situation, a compromise, might be a distortion to a degree of the truth. The Torah even teaches that God himself distorted the truth in order to have peace. When he told Abraham and Sarah they were going to have children, Sarah laughed and said, How are we going to have children? I'm all washed up. My husband's an old man.  God didn't report to Abraham that Sarah said you're also an old geezer. In order to maintain peace between Abraham and Sarah, God did not have full disclosure. Hillel and Shammai debated what is the appropriate way of dancing before a bride at a wedding.  And Shammai said, What are you talking about? Not every bride is gorgeous. How can you say every bride is beautiful? Maybe she's very plain looking or worse. So Shammai said, No, when you dance in front of the bride, you just basically say, Whatever, she's got a great personality. You have to tell the absolute truth. And Hillel says, No, you don't have to be absolutely truthful when it comes to peace. But when people's pride or their greed gets in the way and they insist that it's the principle of the matter, I'm fighting for the principle. I'm not going to compromise. There's never going to be any peace. The Torah prefers mediation and compromise. Refaim of Elijah pointed out that in our prayers, the daily meditation, the 19 blessings, I mentioned the very last blessing is a blessing for peace. And at the very, very end, we take three steps back when we finish the entire prayer. And we say, O seh shalom bim ramav, God makes peace in the upper realms. Huya seh shalom aleinu, he should make peace among us and among all of Israel. And as we say that, we take three steps backwards. And Refaim of Elijah says that you know what, sometimes you've got to retreat from your position in order to have peace. If you want peace, you sometimes have to take steps backward. You can't always hold your ground and insist that you're right. Then the next idea I'm going to share may rub some people the wrong way. But it may well be worth a second look. It's called Vatranus or being Mevater. Which in English means being foregoing, giving in or just letting go. Just let it go. You want to have peace in life? You've got to know that many times just let go. It doesn't mean that you're being weak.  It just means that you value your relationships more than your ego. Or at least it means knowing when to pick your fights. There were people who will make an issue over everything. They've got to correct everything that other people do. Everything has to be perfect. Exactly the way they expect it to be. Sometimes it's just not worth making a stink. Sometimes just let it go. When I come to Shule and I see someone sitting in my seat. Do I have to kick them out of my seat? Or do I let it go? And realize that I'll probably be able to make it through the day sitting next to them. If I'm approaching a parking spot at the same time someone else is approaching the same parking spot. I can just let it go. That's alright. You can have the spot. Sometimes it's very hard to do that. Very hard. Especially if you're in a rush. It can be very hard in life to let go. But Roshach once said that no one ever lost out in life by letting go. If we realize that our friends and family don't have to be perfect. If we sometimes overlook their imperfections. The things that they do. The things that they don't do. That's healthy. The Apt-er-Rav, the famous Apt-er-Rav, Yahushua Heschel of Apt. Wrote a famous book called The Ohev Yisrael. The one who loves Israel. And he was famous for claiming that every chapter in the Bible teaches about how to love other people. And get along with other people. And as students once said that rabbi, we don't see it in this week's Torah portion. We don't see where it happens to be the Torah portion of Balak. The Midianite king that wanted to hire the prophets, Billum, to curse the Jewish people. They said, we don't see, where do you see a lesson? A lesson for Shalom, for peace in that chapter. And he said to them, what are you talking about? It's in the name of the chapter. Right there in the name Balak. And they looked at him, what are you talking about, Balak? That's teaching us about peace? And getting along with others? He said, of course. Look at the word Balak. It stands for And they started to smile and they said, what are you talking about? And Kamochah is not where the kuf, it's where the chaff. And he said, exactly. He said, that's my point. If everything in life has to be 100% perfect, you're never going to have peace in your life. Of course, I should point out, the Torah does urge us to rebuke and reprove people if they're doing the wrong thing. But there's a very delicate art to doing this. And you have to know when to make an issue. Otherwise you may win the battle, but you're going to lose the war. Vatranut, being foregoing, letting go, is the antidote to the Torah prohibition of holding a grudge. The Torah says in Leviticus chapter 19 verse 18, Do not take revenge, do not hold a grudge. What is the difference between taking revenge and holding a grudge?  And he says, absolutely not. The next week he comes to you and says, can I borrow your ladder? So if you say no, you're guilty of taking revenge. If you say, sure, even though you didn't lend me your snow shovel, here's my ladder, that's holding a grudge.  You didn't lend me your snow shovel, but you certainly can have my ladder. That's holding a grudge. And the Torah says that's prohibited. Now think about that.  And so the antidote to this is called being Mevatir, letting it go. With being Mevatir, you disregard the past and you look forward to the future. Of course, there can be a huge incentive for doing this, because the Talmud says in tractate, Rosh Hashanah 17a, that if we are forgiving of others, then the heavenly tribunal will be forgiving of us. That's because, as we say in the book of Psalms, chapter 121 verse 5, Hashem tzilcha, God is your shadow.  That your shadow moves just the way you do. And God is your shadow. So in the same way that you move around in this world, that's how God's going to move in a relationship to you. And if you are forgiving of others, God will be forgiving of you. Now we saw that in the dispute between Moses and Korach, Moses made numerous attempts to meet with Korach and to reconcile with him, even though Moses was the leader of the people, even though Moses was totally right. He was the one that ignored his honor, ignored his being right, and went numerous times to try and reconcile with Korach. The Midrash in Vayikra Rabbah 9-9 says the following, Great is Shalom peace, because about all the other commandments in the Torah, it is written, if you happen upon, if it should occur, if you see, which implies that if the opportunity to do a commandment comes upon you, then you must do it. And if not, you're not bound to do it. But in the case of peace, it is written, seek peace and pursue it. That's from Psalm 34 verse 15. Seek it in the place where you are and pursue it after in another place. Aaron, the brother of Moses, was exemplary as someone who was Rodev Shalom, who pursued peace. It says in Ethics of the Fathers, Perkayavot chapter 1, mission 12, he was someone who was Ohave Shalom, he loved peace, the Rodev Shalom, he pursued peace. He was proactive when it came to pursuing peace and would have no problem bending the truth if it led to peace. Avostar of Nussam, an expansion of the teachings in Perkayavot says that if Aaron knew of a couple who was fighting, a married couple that was arguing, or two friends that were fighting, Aaron would go to each one of them separately. And Aaron would say to each one, do you know the other person, they can't stand what's been happening between you. They feel so terrible about what happened. He told us to each one of them. And when they finally met up with each other, they were able to easily reconcile. There's a wonderful story I read about the Begorayur Rav of Mordechai, about walking one day slowly and thoughtfully along the sidewalks of Tel Aviv. He inspired Orh in all the people that passed by his shining face. Suddenly and uncharacteristically, he turned to his Gaba, his assistant, and told him that he wanted to enter the jewelry store they had just passed by. As the astonished Gaba watched, the Rebbe asked the proprietor of the store to help him select a beautiful watch, a gift for his wife. The owner displayed several samples, but the Rebbe wasn't impressed. Are these watches ones that you consider nice? If they are, you don't really understand fine watches. Finally, the Rebbe asked the proprietor if there were anyone else in the store who could help. The owner called his wife from the back of the store. And she brought over a different-styled watch. And the Rebbe smiled broadly, this is exquisite. It's refined. It's tasteful. It's sophisticated. So he turned to his Gaba and commented, this saleswoman appreciates quality and craftsmanship. He asked how much the watch cost, and the owner named an astronomical figure far more than the Rebbe could afford. But the Rebbe paid for the watch. It took the Gaba, his assistant, several months, but he finally summoned up the courage to ask the Rebbe for an explanation of this bizarre incident. The Rebbe was surprised. Didn't you hear? As we walked past the shop, the owner was shouting at his wife in a loud voice telling her that she knew nothing about watches and had better remain in the back of the store when she wouldn't do any harm. Is any price too high to restore the respect of a Jewish woman? I want to conclude by sharing a wonderful passage from the Talmud in Tractate Brachot 56b. It's a section of the Talmud which deals with dreams. And the Talmud says that if in your dream you see a river, a kettle, or a bird, you can look forward to seeing peace in your life. If you dream about a river, a pot, or a bird, you will see an expect to find peace in your life. The commentaries explain that there are three main things that drive wedges between people and destroy harmony in relationships. These are jealousy, lust, and arrogance. And that's why these kinds of dreams portend peace. A river is beautiful and useful if it stays within its bounds and its banks. It's destructive otherwise. Peace requires that each person be happy with what they have and with their station in life. This is the antidote to jealousy. If you see a kettle or a pot, what does a kettle or a pot do? It unites fire and water to work together harmoniously to cook. What does the pot get out of it? Absolutely nothing, except that it might get burnt and blackened in the process. So the pot negates the lustful attitude of what's in it for me. And finally, the bird combats and is an antidote to arrogance because the bird is flexible and light and will fly away for others and make room for others. And Talmud says that Korach and his group accused him behind his back of the most horrible things. And what did Moses do according to the Talmud? He took up his tent and pitched it outside the camp. He left the scene of the dispute. His reaction to the dispute was to fly away like a bird, to be quiet, not to say anything, to walk away. This tactic is guaranteed to nip any dispute in the bud. I read once about a very successful congregational rabbi and he said that he had one rule that he never violated in all his years in the rabbinate. That was that whenever a congregant accused him of something or said anything inflammatory or disrespectful, situations in which he had every right to put the congregant in his place, his rule was not to say anything.  And he said that invariably five or ten Yom Kippur is down the road. The person will come to him and apologize for talking the way they did. Now it takes tremendous strength of character to keep this kind of silence, especially when the charges and the offenses are so outrageous. But this is the Torah's lesson when it speaks about Moses falling on his face. That the best way to deal with machlokas, with arguments, with strife, is to avoid it, is with silence, is not to engage, is to be like the bird and to take off. I want to give each of us a blessing that we should have more peace in our lives, with our friends, with our relatives, and there should be more peace in the world.


My name is Alfredo Samodio, the son of Alfredo Samodio. In 1970 there was a presidential election in Chile. My father was arrested, interrogated, beaten. He was sentenced to 11 years of prison. I went to see him and he told me he had received letters. The letters were communicating in a very respectful way, telling him the procedure to leave Chile. The whole thing started with a man called Roberto Cossack. He was a junior officer at the International Committee for European Migrations, which later became IOM. And he saw all the thousands and thousands of political prisoners that the regime had. And he saw what they were doing to them. He wanted to do a change. The IOM organized the logistics and then the date was set. We were going to leave Chile on September 15, 1976. No matter how bad the situation is, you can give people hope. You can change that situation in life. And that was what Roberto Cossack did. This was an out-of-return regime. He was a P2 person, perhaps a very low in the ranking, the national ranking. But he said, what if I do this? What will happen? And that changed my life.


But there are a large number of lawsuits and the team of beyond law CLC and ULS thought that let's have a person who will give us a though we will call it a bird eye view, but we are quite sacrosanct that the doubts which are in the mind of anybody will be displayed today. Welcome you sir on behalf of beyond law CLC and ULS Punjabi University Chandigarh. Sir, very good evening to all viewers. This is a interactive session organized by Mr. Charter through ages of CLC. It is always a privilege to share views especially on a question of marriage which have changed paradigm after 85 to be precise after 25th December 1983 when the legislature brought section 306 in addition to section 113A with the presumption in section 498A. The courts which were earlier not engaged with the matrimonial litigation were suddenly flooded with the litigation. Before that we come to the law relating to marriages. Law can be applied in abstract. A law has philosophical moorings. It is to the ground realities of a country or a nation. It has a socio-economic value and law is to be applied in that context. So far philosophical moorings are concerned. It is said the first time Sigmund Freud came with psychoanalysis. He said there is a conscious mind. There is a subconscious mind and there is an unconscious mind. It is an unconscious mind in which determines the behavior of a human being. Therefore so far marriages are concerned. One is subject to change. Change is subject to pain. He said that it is due to auditory complex or in a childhood one requires certain kind of sexual preferences and for which suddenly two human beings become compatible. Two human beings can't stand each other. You will find that all human beings are good. It is in which how they are placed It is their behavior determines.  At the same time came a Jungi with a different theory. He said it is a nulltical psychology. He said it is nothing. It is mal-adjustments. It is mal-adjustments which determine our behavior. And the third philosopher who came is Adler with an individual psychology. He said no, neither is a sexual preferences nor it is mal-adjustments. In fact, it is an ego clash which determines our compatibility or incompatibility. In our relationship there is one dominant relationship and one is a subordinate to that relationship. This is a psychological analysis of a subconscious mind which determines the behavior of two human beings. One man and another woman which leads to success of a marriage. Before that, I must quote two things. They just said there is an anonymous saying that a husband and wife may disagree on many things but they must absolutely agree on this to never ever give up. So it is determination to continue in the institution of marriage which leads to the success of marriage. Another philosopher, Dev Muran said a great marriage is not when the perfect couple comes together. It is when an imperfect couple learns to enjoy their differences. So besides our differences, we when start understanding the person live with over imperfections then the success of marriage came. Contrary to this, there is a Hindu belief that marriage is made in heaven. It is predetermined. This is when you're even when it takes birth to whom you will be married. It is their marriage is a sacred institution. We give sabbat pati, gives wars to take care. The salmon promises are exchanged and the marriage in fact is a sacred institution alien to marriages and other religions which determine it as a social contract. So far over law is concerned, over social values concerned, the relationship of husband and wife, institution of marriage is well recognized in law. Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act recognizes privilege between husband and wife but it says when the husband and wife step into witness box, they can claim a privilege that any communication made with husband and wife, they cannot disclose and they can take a communication as a lawyer client relationship. One can claim a privilege. So while deposing as a witness husband and wife, there is a privilege available. Similarly, section 27 of the Indian Pinochote says that the wife, if a wife is in possession of the property, it would be understood that husband is in possession of the property. So to this extent, law recognizes relationship of two human beings, man and a woman, as a husband and wife. So far section 122 and section 127 of the Indian Pinochote is concerned. In 1985, this Indian Pinochote was made in 1860. Offences relating to marriage are covered under chapter 20 of the Indian Pinochote. So far the lawmaker's Indian Pinochote was concerned. The marriage was an entirely private affair where the state will not intrude, will not cause an interference. All offenses under chapter 20, starting from section 493 to 498, they were non-conservable offenses. Therefore, the police cannot register a case. One has to file a complaint to prosecute another person. Similarly, it is not that anybody can launch the complaint. A right was only given to institute prosecution only to the agreed person. Who's an agreed person?  On his behalf, father, mother, they can file a complaint. Similarly, if the man, husband is in an army and on his behalf, with the leave of court, somebody can file a complaint. So much so, you will see that in our friends of Bikimi, it is only a agreed wife, which is the first wife or second wife, who can file a complaint. Nobody else can find. You will find number of new stars who perform second marriage. They are living well even if they are not converted because there is no agreed party. A third person cannot launch a complaint. Therefore, till 1985, till 1980, it will remain an entirely private affair between two citizens and state and no concern with them until parties to the marriage opted to bring their dispute to the court of law. Therefore, we must understand that till police state was kept out of the marriage, over litigation was very less. So, what are the offenses which are given in chapter 20? Let's have a broad quick review. Section 493 and section 496 and 494, they are regarding the sham marriages, marriages which are due to the deceit or by a fraudulent. One is made to believe that a woman is a wife of a person and he have a section to post on the context of the marriage, which is a sham marriage, then these offenses are there. They are also to be at the stance of a grieved wife. Section 494 and 495 are offenses of bygamy, where only a grieved wife could launch the proceedings or a grieved husband from whom the fact of marriage is concealed can institute the proceedings. Section 497 is a offense regarding the adultery, which has been recently made in a judgment by the Constitutional Branch of the Supreme Court in Joseph Schein 2019, Volume 3, SEC, Page 39 has held to be ultra-virus saying that it brings discrimination between two genders and therefore the offense of adultery cannot remain unconstitutional. It is with the concept that woman is neither a child, woman is neither a property of a man, she is an individual, she has her own rights, therefore 497 and so far section 198 of CRPC, which gives the vice way to launch prosecution have been set aside by a five-judge bench, all concurring to an extent that offense of section 497 has outlived and in the present era, in the modern era, this offense under section 497 cannot remain unconstitutional. So the offense of adultery is no longer unconstitutional. Then we have criminal elopement which comes under section 198. So what this of chapter 20 was concerned, I said till 1982 no policemen could barge into a family affairs or a relationship of husband and wife until they wanted to initiate the proceedings. First came issue before Punjab and I could, whether gifts given to the wife at the time of marriage, they constitute history then of a woman and if the same is not returned by the husband or they are interested to the family members of the husband and they are retained and they are not accounted upon whether offense under section 406 IPC will be made out or not. First in lead came full bench judgment on Punjab and Rihanna High Court in Unodh Kumar city versus state of Punjab in 1982, Punjab and Rihanna paid 372. They recognized gifts given to the wife at the time of marriage by husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law, relations of the husband, relations of the wife, Dori Artikas as Isti Dhan but they said that there is a joint position of husband and wife relying upon the partnership act saying that if the two partners their whole joint property, no offense of misappropriation is made out and section 406 is not made out. The matter went to the Supreme Court, full bench of Punjab and Rihanna High Court was set aside in a judgment and Pratibarani versus Suraj Kumar 1985 volume 2 SEC paid 372. They relied upon the observations of Sir Guru Das Banerjee in Hindu law and marriage. They quoted Katyan and said neither the husband nor the son nor the father nor the brother has the power to alienate the legal property of a woman and if any of them shall consume such property against her consent he shall be compelled to pay its value with interest to her and shall also pay fine to the king. Whatever she has put amicably into the hands of the husband afflicted by disease suffering from distress or society pressed by characters he should repay that by his own free will. Then aligned with Manu they said what kind of gifts gifts made before the at the time of marriage gives made at the bridal position gives made in token of law by by in laws by father-in-law mother-in-law elder of the family of the husband gives made by father gets made by mother gets made by brother and sister they all constitute is the done and it is not a joint property it is exclusive property of the wife and it the same is retained by the husband he will not account for the same offense under section 406. So in 1983 offense of 406 came on a statue where it became a condisable offense and five can initiate proceedings by getting a case registered and first time came the involvement of the woman. Then there was suddenly a rise in the suicide the women were afflicted by cruelty there was a harassment there was a maltreatment and a joint committee of both the houses of the parliament came with the recommendation that the penal law should be brought on a statue book so that the wife the those who commit offense of cruelty to the wife they are prosecuted therefore on 25th of December 1983 section 498A came on the statue book as a chapter 20A of the Indian penal code and similarly with the section 306 section 113A was added and it was said that if the woman commits suicide with the sound of years of a marriage it will be presumed that the husband and wife that the husband and his relations treated the wife with cruelty and therefore they will be presumed to be guilty and that this presumption was to be the onus was on the family members of the husband to rebut the presumption along with that came section 198B which said that besides wife who can finally complain that is by relations by marriage by blood or by adoption therefore on the behalf of the wife complaining could be filed by her father by her mother by brother and sister of father or mother and they could launch the proceedings and also the section 498A only a grieve person within the ambit of section 198B could launch the proceedings now let's see what are the offenses of suicide who have they have been dealt by the courts what is the argument to suicide one has to take recourse to section 107 of the Indian penal code class first of all says that if one someone instigates the person to commit to offense to commit suicide then those then that person can be as they can continue all right it said the first time came a judicial manager panjab and I quote Raj Kumar versus state of Punjab they said that instigate means if someone propel, impel, provoke, God, somebody to commit suicide then only an active role of a mission commission can constitute offensive suicide then came a judgment of Gangula Monredi and Amidu Lupal Jhanta I will just give the citation briefly Gangula Monredi versus state of Andhra Pradesh and Amidu Lupal Jhantu versus state of West Bengal they said the orderly discord and petulants in day-to-day life in a will not constitute offense of abatement to suicide what is the definition of a cruelty as subject under section 113A it is said that definition of the cruelty will be same as under section 198 I will see which we will discuss when we take section 498A for discussion number of issues came say if a husband is a drunkard he is alcoholic and he harass the wife whether it will amount to abatement to suicide then the judgments came on either side that if husband takes liquor and his wife restrained him and husband is not accepting their strength and then why commit suicide it will not be abatement to suicide but if being a husband being a colleague cause harassment take away the money give beating to the wife then it will be a vice which lead to the suicide and the husband can prosecute it and convict it similarly it came that if husband is having an extra marriage or relationship whether the same will constitute abatement to suicide or not a very good judgment has come by the Supreme Court which one must read that is Panakke Mahapatra Rawal versus state of Gujarat 2013 volume 10 SEC it is says alienation of affection for the first time it was introduced that if wife feels that he is not given affection by the husband affection of the husband is a towards another woman that alienation of affection in worse circumstances will constitute mental coreality depending on the evidence that is a very good judgment which all criminal lawyers are practicing on the criminal side must read that is 2013 volume 10 SEC paid for it one judgment on a suicide which I will strongly recommend though it has been watered down by the time is a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in a shag Birgit Chhansharda versus state of Maharashtra 1984 AR 19 16442 1622 they have gone into the various law various books of psychology as to what how the society tendencies are dwell for one becomes a hypersensitive in which case one will commit suicide their life on the book of Robert J. Christian one of death society and human experiences and others as into what circumstances one will commit suicide this will give a perspective a vision to a criminal lawyer regarding suicide regarding deaths which is committed by taking poison the one of the condition prerequisite that the prosecution must explain as though the poison was obtained no longer is accepted by the judicial verdict has been watered down but at the same time it is a very good judgment which all criminal lawyers or those practice on criminal side or if you want to have your vision regarding the suicide this must be dead as therefore I strongly recommend shag Birgit Chhansharda versus state of Maharashtra 1984 AR page 1622 having said about section 304 B 306 I want to know section 304 B of the Indian vehicle this section came on a statue book in 1986 along with section 113 B of the code of evidence site Indian evidence site section 304 B says that if a woman within some years of marriage death is caused by burns body injury or it is a death which is otherwise in the normal circumstances and the death is been seven years and it is shown that the soon before the marriage she was subjected to credit on the account of Dori it will be a Dori death now lot of issues came what is a Dori if her husband and wife are living for four or five years husband in order to enhance his business take financial help or aid from in laws or if on the birth of a child in arena you will find number of cases where it is called two chick ceremony is there when the if the gifts are not given properly or if only say a count of a birth of a child gift is not given whether same will constitute jury demand of Dori or not we must realize that to cover up this the Dori prescription act was amended the definition of the Dori was changed and it was said Dori it was included that any time after marriage earlier in the definition of the Dori it was not any time after the marriage once the amendment came no it was covered up and course came to conclusion by interpretation that even after the marriage a financial aid is given in relation to the marriage success of the marriage it will come within the definition of the Dori and after the second 304 will be made out one of the judgment is Prem Kamal Vasya state of Rajasthan 2009 volume 3 SSE page 726 then the question came what will what is that soon before then the court says soon before cannot be put in straight checkers but suddenly it is not immediate before the death unnatural death of the wife therefore a treacherous bench to reconcile the differences overruled the various judgments of the Supreme Court and came to conclusion that the exhaustive definition which is very broad of Dori will prevail and soon before it is not immediate it can be it must have a nexus and it must be qualified by relative time place and action and therefore it will be soon before it will depend upon facts and circumstances the case that 3 by judgment judgment very well written by Justice Rintern Ariman is a Rajinder Singh versus state of Punjab 2015 volume 6 SSE page 477 now having covered a broad under definition of Dori we must take that even suicide by a ride which also is an unnatural death and even if a murder there is no evidence in the house the offense is committed within four corners of the house it is by burns it is by bodily injury that is also covered under section 304 v simply because there is not evidence of the murder but wife has died inside the house therefore it affects under section 304 v IPC is made out then the question death questions of the death of a woman came inside the family house in the matrimonial house where there is no demand of Dori there is no cruelty but why suddenly die or is found dead because of injuries or otherwise in the house of a husband that is a her matrimonial home then the courts came to conclusion that presumption in the section 106 under section 302 will be implied and it since the facts are especially in the knowledge of husband he has to explain how a wife became died in the four corners of the house that is a matrimonial home therefore at the house came to conclusion that offense in the section 302 IPC made out along with came issue cropped up whether a husband was charged for offense under section 302 can he be convicted for the offense under section 306 IPC the first time in the case of lakindas in the team that the charges under section 306 and 302 are distinct they are mutually exclusive if the prosecution come in the theory of a suicide then you can't commit somebody with 302 the prosecution charged it has to contain the facts prosecution must tell that you whether he's committed offense of a abatement to suicide or offense of a merger there came Supreme Court judgments of speaking differently somebody said lying on a William Selle Biden constitutional bench William Selle was in 19 versus Madhya Pradesh 1956 Supreme Court which is a constitutional bench that a prejudice must come up then negating section 222 of CRPC lying upon section 464 CRPC that there's a mission or there is an addition of a charge the Supreme Court reconciled by three that gentlemen said that the alternative charges can be framed subject to where the woman has died in the house therefore a charge in the section 302 in alternate charge for offense under section 304 b can be formulated then the Supreme Court also came that offensive one is tried for offense under section 304 b then 306 is a minor offense to section 304 b and then conviction can be a for offense under section 306 IPC also even one is tried for offense under section charge and tried for offense under section 304 b IPC we can be convicted for offense under section 306 IPC these are the broad issues which came up regarding offense under 302 304 b and 306 at one time just is card to give a direction that once there is a offense under section 304 b the courts must formulate alternative charge of offense under section 302 IPC the duty was cast upon the court later justice charcoal in a three-judge bench watered down that judgment overall saying that it is not necessary for the court to formulate alternative charge but in the facts and circumstances of the court's mind the courts can always formulate alternative charges now having covered up to the charge now we come up when my wife a friend of rape is made out you must know that so far the marital rape is concerned this is no longer on the statute bow in the various other countries and he said that nobody can perform sexual intercourse with the wife without that consent and the concept of a marital rape has been introduced it is not on the statute book and even if somebody's campaign the police will not register it is but close to this came there is a exception two to section 375 it says that a wife is more than 15 years of the age if husband commit forcibly sexual intercourse that will not be a criminal offense the definition of section rape was clean and 375 the exception to continue then came a judgment of the supreme court they says that it is a discriminatory if a wife if a a woman less than 18 years can give a consent we cannot make it compulsory cannot take it on the account of a wife who's more than less than 18 years of age but more than 15 years of age therefore they have set aside that part and said that even in case of a wife she must be above 18 years of age therefore the judgment of the supreme court court independent thought versus rule of India 2017 volume 10 supreme court cases page 800 the section 375 exception to read that a section intercourse or a sexual act by man with his own wife the wife being under 15 years of age is more not rape now this question was formulated that the exception carved out in the IPC creates an unnecessary and artificial distinction between a married girl child and an unmarried girl child and has no clear nexus with any clear objective sought to achieve therefore exception to a section 375 was held to be violative of article 14 15 21 of the consequences and similarly clause 6 of section 375 we say that the it must be 18 years above was read with and similarly section 198 subsection 6 which gives the right to the real party was also held to be violated the constitution now we come to the reference under section 498 section 498 a 406 as you know has flooded the courts and all cases have come up there is said that there's a false implication of the husband the implication is of the all members of the family of the husband even in a matrimonial relationship has failed the institution of marriage is crumbling it is failing because of introduction of section 498 a of IPC I must refer to the report of national crime record record bureau in 2005 558,390 cases were reported for offense under section 498 a 127 and 560 persons are arrested 6141 cases are found to be false this number swelled in 2009 to 89,546 cases 1,74395 persons arrested it was found that 8352 cases were false in 2013 466000 and 79 cases are pending before the court out of which only seven 7258 cases resulted into conviction 38165 cases the court was drawn and 4800 for 8218 cases are withdrawn this number swelling of numbers so much cases disturb the supreme court and the lawmakers therefore in the first time in Arnesh Kumar v. state of Bihar the supreme court came a referring to section 41 and 41 a of the court of criminal procedure that before arrest of the husband is to be affected investigating officers shall record reasons as to why arrest is necessary and therefore before giving affecting arrest for since our friends in the section is to your connection is less than sometimes to be what is less than seven years he must give a notice to the husband or relations expressing his intention to affect the arrest but this Arnesh Kumar judgment was broadened in another judgment that is Rajesh Kumar Sharma you were just as boys in 2018 volume 10 sec page 472 said that this family welfare committee shall be constituted by every district that before a case is registered and effort will be made to reconcile the differences and on basis of the report of the committee family welfare committee only the cases will be registered this was challenged under article 32 and the three-judge bench in a case of social action forum for Manu Adhikar 2018 volume 10 sec page 443 had set aside various directions given by two-judge bench in Rajesh Sharma and had that the court cannot legislate the court cannot formulate family welfare committees it is only three conditions apply that the notice will be given reasons will be recorded as to why arrest is necessary and recovery of Dori article is not a condition testing for grant of bail and the bail application shall be decided on the same day now lot of issues are raised as section 498 is concerned where the jurisdiction to register the case will rest in the police now this is no longer a Syntegna in Rupali Devi a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court on a reference hand that if the wife is also staying at the parents house and even no physical act had occurred at that place since the wife left the place where the fence on the section 498 had occurred she was carrying mental agony by silence therefore the definition of 498 which says willful conduct amounting to cruelty physical and mental that mental part will continue even the wife resides at the parents house so nothing has occurred because of mental agony mental current is continuing that place also will have a jurisdiction to try the offense this judgment given by the Supreme Court on the jurisdiction is Rupali Devi versus state of Uttar Pradesh 2019 volume 5 sec a 384 so far jurisdiction according 406 offenses concerned we have section 181 subsection before it says that husband who is having trustment over the property is done must account for the account for the property at the place where the wife is residing therefore even wife after leaving the matrimonial home is residing at the place where the parents are residing for offense in the section 406 IBC that is will also have a jurisdiction and the police can register it is there so therefore the jurisdiction issue which engaged the courts on number of times 402 petition was filed no longer exists nor the wife at the house of the parent house even nothing has occurred a court offense under section 498 a 406 IBC case can be registered now various issues came up regarding the offense under section 498 a now the definition of the cruelty has been brought in by bringing into protection of women from domestic violence act there the financial if is withdrawn emotional sport is not given emotional harassment emotional cruelty that definition has been brought in and the same thing the Supreme Court said that they both must be in tandem and in harmony therefore Supreme Court in a case of recently the three judgements said they will give a judicial verdict to enhance the objective of the legislation therefore it must be read together now in Punjab in another places one is confronted with NRI marriages marriages where a NRI will come will affect a marriage will stay with the house of a loss have a consummate marriage for 3-4 months and then go abroad and will desert the wife now this is confounding if the how to affect service upon the husband who has left the country though by the court giving various directions I've given to the ministry of external affairs there's a desk created in the or ministry a joint sector is there that subject to certain documents given the service will be effective but it has not yet a tea even the passport is empowered even if the property of husband is resided nothing meaningful has been done to bring husband to the law book or before the court of law these are the broad issues regarding offenses of marriage I have done no I will invite the questions so there are a lot of questions I will request Siri to put the question so that I'm able to answer them one question I will read the questions for your convenience so that we can have a concentrated look towards this is there any judgment by the Supreme Court that in case of section 406 there is no need of reinvestigation of the bills and proves by the I.O. who did not file the bills etc at the time of charge sheet see these even the bills have not filed you can party can always take really close to section 311 CRPC can file an application with 311 before the magistrate saying that matter be referred for further investigation the I.O. to verify the bills and then make it a part of it even if I will not make it application file under section 311 at any state for bringing those bills on the file of the case so application can be made to the magistrate at the time of filing of the charge sheet or before that that investigating officer be directly to take bills into consideration this direction can be also obtained under section 402 if charge sheet has been filed an application can be given that the direction can be given to may be given to the I.O. to further investigate and make bills part of the investigation and even if the I.O. has not done that case charges have been framed then also application can be filed under section 311 CRPC at any stage of the proceeding saying that these bills be taken to consideration and a witness can be examined by the wife say a jeweler from whom the jeweler has purchased say from the way the expenses of marriage was incurred he can be brought as a witness as a court witness and taking it across to section 311 in appeal one can take it across to section 394 for additional evidence next question please Bhavna Khemani if the husband is alcoholic and the wife refuses sexual relation is the husband justified if he is emotionally torturing his wife see this will depend upon the evidence of a very each case if a husband is alcoholic comes to the house abuse the wife give a beating to the wife if his actions fall within the definition of cruelty which is mental and physical then as a colleague has a virtue which snatch the money he give a beating to the wife will constitute offense of cruelty but a wife has a right to refuse a sexual intercourse it is her privilege her right and if she refuses husband can say amounts to cruelty and seek a divorce under the definition under the case of celebrated case of kastur was the kastur that denial of sexual relations consummation of marriage amounts to cruelty over hindu laws concerned it can be good ground for a divorce but it cannot be a ground up for a husband to inflict cruelty he cannot say the wife to yield or compel her for a sexual intercourse by physically or mentally say he is cutting a scathing remarks he is saying telling a woman something you are afraid you are useless you are banned so and so then these words will constitute a mental cruelty within the definition of sexual pornography no straight gender formula can be laid it depends upon the facts and circumstances evidence of each case next question please thank you meanwhile certain persons had posted their questions before 5 30 somehow there was a link missing they can repost their questions yes sandeep parmavati he takes a cue from two persons are being in Gaurav he says i agree with them and the question is same he says as such a genuine cases are being burdened on the judiciary that many cases of perjury are taking toll in the courts why allow motivated litigation into the courts wherein you find that the wife has done without any actually substantiated in any manner see there is a bar under section 195 crpc and section 340 crpc that if a house is a woman commits a perjury or a fancy car the false cases are locked nobody can prosecute all the prosecution only rest in the public servant for the certain offenses as definition is given in section 195 public servant or by the court in a relation to which offenses committed it is for the court that it is expedient in the interest of justice to launch the perjury proceedings it is said that in our courts number of persons take recourse to the false suit each and every case cannot be prosecuted we are already burdened with areas of cases over docked exploring if we start prosecuting then main cases will not be decided quarterly only settled with the cases of a perjury and in every case a litigant is believed that other parties not telling a lie if this inquiry starts we will not be able to justify our cases therefore the legislation in wisdom has created a bar under section 195 in the applications why in a given case where it is expedient in the interest of justice to do so the court will take recourse to section 340 and shall inquire a matter after inquiring the matter the court shall file a complaint of offense of perjury or a public servant can file a complaint saying that offenses made out say of offense under section 211 218 IPC these are offenses basically against the administration of justice there is a separate chapter of these offenses and therefore a right has not been given to litigate a litigate to initiate proceedings of the perjury he can only pay to the court that whether falsehood is bad privilege whereas it's so falsehood that the conscience of the court is shaken the court will take recourse to prosecute the person who has committed offense in administration of justice by the courts therefore for a valid reasons this right has not been given to every litigate to initiate a proceedings of the perjury this remains a public servant or with the court so far as offense of perjury is concerned sir CSG in almost all matrimonial disputes cases entire maintainers is awarded at the first instance without examining the merits or not is disputable the real merits of the cases that is HMA, DV, 498 are heard in the last why not direct merits of the cases with evidence and after that the judgment of since our topic is regarding the offenses not of the maintenance but since the question has come the entire maintenance is awarded with the only condition that a wife should not go to the arms she should not go for a packing as per her status she should survive during the course of the litigation as in the Hindu marriage act under section 23-24 entire maintenance awarded under the protection of women is consigned even 125 CRPC entire maintenance is granted it is for give a sustainer survive to have a litigation in case of Asaram while as a judge of Bapu Asaram while as a judge of Rajasthan I quoted Chotpur I awarded entire maintenance to the Vikcham morning to rupees three lakhs so that she can sustain litigation one of the condition where that Apu Asaram is having a battery of wires whereas she is not able she has to survive you can have a system for a protection of a witness witness protection program so that she can withstand if she needs a financial help or if her help can be given even though the entire maintenance can be given to the victim of a rape that is there it is for sustainers and survival during the course of a litigation. Abhinav Sharma don't you think sir that there is a mindset and limited response of courts towards the plighted faced or plights faced by the husband in such cases even if a false case is found the courts are least inclined to take action against the false accusation much less the action under section 211. It's a debate on going on debate I have already referred to the case of Anesh Kumar to the case of Rajesh Sharma and then the recent case of Manu Vadikar by the Supreme Court the courts are conscious that in number of cases husband if it's not husband relation of the husband say a Bhuga of the husband will marry 30 years ago a tie of a husband or elder brother of the father of the husband who has retired of his 80 years he's brought into litigation number of relations are brought therefore the courts have had that there is a misuse of section 498 but misuse itself is not sufficient to come to conclusion that women are not being harassed so therefore the section will remain it has to be course have to be hyperactive to avoid plight of the relations of the harassment of the relations of the husband no I missed it who are the relations who can be prosecuted in a one case brother of a bhabhi of the husband was brought and accused then as a lawyer taking recourse to the analogy of section 198b I said it can only be relation definition of relation will include by blood by marriage or by adoption therefore brother of a bhabhi of the husband is neither will not come with an ambit of definition of relation so far blood marriage and adoption is concerned therefore I succeed in 482 just as Garewal question proceeding therefore one has to court has to be acted courts are conscious of it therefore in a case of a nishkama course at 498 a arrest should not be affected I have to record reasons as to why arrest is necessary and then the courts further came to conclusion that given notice and 498 a of seven days at ease so that husband and the relations can obtain ante-specification then in Ragesh Sharma that it is with though the family welfare committees are formulated a preliminary inquiry was said I may say that a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court constitution meant Lalitha Kamari being conscious said if a matrimonial offenses are to be listed a preliminary inquiry must be conducted by the investigating officer so the system is in place courts are overactive under Ragesh Sharma it was held that recovery of a Dori article is a not a condition present for grant of aid this direction given by the Supreme Court in Ragesh Sharma has been upheld by three judge bench in a manavadika case therefore the courts are conscious courts are active they are taking it but there is a harassment of a husband in few cases would not mean that the offense of cruelty to the wife will not exist on this section the person is anonymous but he writes with the showing us why so I can understand and he says that I'm an NRI my wife filed a case at the 498 a 307 please guide how to handle such a situation once I am innocent right consultations can't be given in this session he must consult his lawyer right this will be one has to be very cautious yes Abhinav Sharma sir there is a mindset and a limited response of courts towards the plight faced by the husband in such cases even if false no that has been made because he's repeated that question I agree with you I must say that Abhinav has been a decent advocate general he's a very leading advocate of a Rajasthan and he has a flair he writes very well is the most elephant council it is true that there is a plight of husband it is true but one must understand it's the intent of the legislature till 1983 in the entire Indian criminal code no accused was named after this night on 25th or somewhere 1983 offense under section 498 it come for the first time in IPC the accused was named that is husband and his relationship earlier it was whoever so commits offense this legislature brought it it's a when the courts had tried to legislate it said it's not a function of a legislature that time is coming the thinking is coming it is true that in every family we have introduced police in over social value the family used to resolve by their own mediation by their own panchayat the family disputes the only panchayat they have a brotherhood when the matrimonial disputes are resolved they are no longer the world has grown time has grown once a sexual plot for 98 a 406 scream for blood and offense then all all cases are coming till 1983 to 2005 husband was a dirty word for the court everything the courts will grant bail to the all relations but will not to the husband husband will go for a one day will be bail granted but times are changing we are evolving we the courts want to save the institution of marriage the response of course is also changing as is evident in the case of a nation kumar rajesh Sharma and manavadkar the courts have evolved the law we are in process of evolving and we will evolve for the good times and the husband will also come at par with their wife and his flight can also be understood but it is true that the woman has a special so far entire our legal system is concerned this has a special category we have a special category for old and from if we go to the proviso of section 437 which is being it is said women the court will be extra indulgent to grant the woman is considered a weakling abla and this is something the courts have a different perspective for women for a weaker section when i became a judge a senior judge told me that a judge must be biased bias for whom he said bias for a woman voice for a oppressed for a dalit who are voiceless who have nothing that judge must be extra compassionate about them these are the ingrained in our system next question we have muted abhinav because abhinav was posting few questions and once you have said that i said that let him be that we ask a question he may not feel has our question i say he have question abhinav is very dear to me is a very dear to me uh no i can say admit it i never admit it he used to appear to for me and for his eloquence i always have soft corner this after retirement this i can admit that's your lordship's greatness my lord and i have always appreciated the way your lordship has been treating us and has always been a teacher to us in the bar while your lordship was in bench here but i had a specific question one with regard to this nri marriages this is an important aspect which i want to touch because there are offenses which are in a cases filed over here and say for example a boy is residing out of country can there be a provision in the uh i mean uh i have seen one such case in my entire career as for 15 years as a lawyer now there can be an anti-suit injunction against the dowry of the proceedings which are going in uh abroad countries say for example america and can those anti-suits anti-institute injunctions which are granted by courts uh usually in india would be resulting into some good fruitful results say for example there is a degree of divorce in america and then an anti-suit injunction is filed over here in this country and there is a degree granted for an anti-suit injunction whether that degree will still be valid for indian legal context in that particular manner or what would be the situation in that cases hey this is a uh i'll deal with this nri marriages why is the offering of hormone precinct alubalia justice in speaking for the assay nri marriages that they will make the last part of the transaction is abroad the court and the 482 can question the proceedings then dispute arose arose in many cases regarding the custody of the child the question came that in a divorce petition the custody of the child is determined by the courts abroad say american court can go down that uh u k has given a decree as to the how the custody of the child is to be decided the courts saying article 226 or it of abdus corpus said print is practice jurisdiction west in the court that the decree can be taken into consideration as a possessive value the paramount welfare of the child will be constitution for the court because court have a printed jurisdiction and the court will give direction which is better for the child say the courts came to conclusion that if a girl child is less than five years and there's a girl child even if we said that the custody will remain with the husband the court said the courts are nothing doing since we have a printed jurisdiction we will not accept this and say that the custody of the girl child less than five years won't remain without mother so if that child is a breastfed by the mother the courts have said part of the child is 14 years 15 years a male child is taking an education abroad and if the custody has been given to the father the courts have been lied upon the church so we take the judgment as a possessive value so a divorce say for a is three than for the properties to be divided all conditions have been settled agreed between the parties that is a good ground taken by the courts to question the proceeding as in Herman precinct Alamoli's case sir we have we are unmuting Jaapna Delo uh she wants a question to be posed um hi sir sir i want to know that um three years ago i was evicted from my matrimonial home and i want to know what to do regarding my passport in the sense that does it fall under a criminal breach of trust or does it have to do i have to refresh it getting a new passport and of course my my husband needs to i mean what does the passport fall under and how should i proceed with that regarding don't formulate question questions you can be i can be quoted that don't formulate personal questions don't ask personal questions it is sad that it's a bad it is said that justice alamoli is cited in the court of law don't it you can put the question in a general form okay generally sir if sorry sir generally if one's passport is also part of the properties that have been kept by the by the in-laws then how does one proceed with uh with um you know the complaint does it have to go under a separate section because we are we are accused in some proceedings one is accused in some proceedings the supreme court has said the passport may not be kept and you can take your permission from the court for release of the passport and after getting the passport released we're saying that you will return the passport after you undertake a journey you can take permission from the court to go abroad no but if they say that they've destroyed they've destroyed it should not my husband so shouldn't the uh the people who've kept anybody's passport be held liable or be punished for the fact that would it not be very difficult for a wife always be issued you can go to the passport officer get the passport issued if it is destroyed these are the specific problems of an individual so this should not be made part of the webinar thank you Sandeep Paramati has posted lots of questions and now he is also raising hand we are transmuting him because at least he will have a composite question to be asked yes Sandeep has been unmuted Sandeep hello yeah so good evening sir this is Sandeep Paramati I'm from Andhra Balish sir my questions are around the dowry prohibition act which was enacted in 1961 so the first question I have is around section three of dowry prohibition act it says punish or prosecute both parties which are giving and taking dowry but if you look at the ncrb data we do not find anybody who is prosecuted for the offense of giving dowry only dowry takers are prosecuted and punished it is true that prosecution should be launched there is a dowry prohibition officer you can approach him you can launch the proceedings but please understand that giving of a dowry if the case is somebody has to file a case okay sir why does police not book the parties other parties also in the same case because the complainant is giving a complaint that her father or relative is giving the dowry and her husband our husband family is taking the dowry sir when the complainant is giving two parties names why police book only one party and let go the other party that is my question sir it is true it is not happening we must see that in the context 1986 an amendment came if a woman commit a die abatement of suicide or our 304b earlier the property used to go to the husband because under the succession act the husband is entitled to the property legislation amended it said that a woman has died because offense in section 3 or 4b or 306 then the property will go to her parents it is true that section 3 of the dowry prohibition act say that offense will be if anybody you give a dowry is a call is an offense no prosecutions are coming nobody is initiated police should initiate it is not coming at least the dowry prohibition officer should initiate the proceedings so it is said there is another dowry the dowry prohibition act who's are there the list of the dowry articles given is to be prepared list is never prepared a kind of allegations that I was compelled to give a these kind of a dowry or the dowry was demanded but then the courts also was having idea that for a six or some marriage the father is compelled to part with the dowry article therefore a kind of a this system that dowry should be prohibited for a dowry prohibition act no same complaints are coming it is true thank you sir a saapandheer who has been the vice president of the bar plus he's a trained mediator he wants to put a question a question directly because he's obviously since he's a mediator he wants that certain flip towards the mediation should also be given such like cases so that the differences are pleased out over to you someone sir sir good evening jee uh in fact sir my uh take is that uh that before lodging with uh any FIR the police people should send all the complaints once to the mediation center because the in mediation it's very helpful for all these matrimonial matters but mainly as my lord has said that it is main problem is with the parties are the ego problem amongst uh i'm not said ego that is uh adler said it he said uh jung said it it is a mal adjustment one said it's ego one he said it's a section preferences that's right philosophical moorings what is it we don't know but this direction was given in a reshama's case by the supreme court saying that a family welfare committee is being constituted before cases are registered the family welfare committee report should be taken medication register or not the role of mediator is to be played by the family welfare committee which was to be constituted by just like that who's the president of a legal service authority but this has been set aside by the three judgements saying overruling it saying that the courts cannot legislate it is for legislature to introduce but it's important in a lalata kawari's case a constitution maker said that before a case of matrimonial offenses are registered a preliminary inquiry ought to be had yes that that's there thank you sir uh we have unmuted indu indu has posed a question uh indu uh you can both uh pose the question directly indu prashad yeah hello sir yes sir sir my question is sir is bearing from cohabitation uh by husband on mere uh doubt of having extra material affair will come under mental my question is uh is bearing a wife from cohabitation on mere doubt of having an extra material affair will come under uh cruelty mental cruelty if wife alleges that husband is having extra material relations or husband is alleging wife is having extra material relationship uh husband is alleges uh i mean on wife on wife that he wife then he can take a plea in the hindu marriage act for a dissolution of the marriage saying that uh wife was having extra marital relations but let's know that before section 497 was set aside by the supreme court of our country even wife who was having extra marital relations could not be prosecuted so for offenses wife is concerned no offense exists as well as the statute book is concerned for prosecution of the wife it is only a ground which is available before a family court for an element of the marriage sir my question is uh bearing from cohabitation will come under mental cruelty or not it is you have to go to the stana versus darshan they say that if wife refuses it is in the not so far criminal offense is concerned it is in a family court so far a matrimonial relations an element or divorce is concerned so nothing criminal about it all right thank you so vikasi we are already up or how many questions so the questions are invariably i i was just seeing and somebody said that it's not a consultation primarily i'm seeing that large number of questions are invariably uh boiling down from there either the client or the person suffering because one thing which i would be happy to share today was one of the session where we had also the public at large participating in the on the webinar otherwise invariably it is the students professors lawyers etc one last question i will ask sumati uh she will be unmute her we are unmuting her so sumati has a question she's a practicing lawyer out here only and another fascinating fact today sir you would have seen so all webinars we are holding we are pan india presence and the people who are asking questions are also not restricted to panjabhri and aiko but they are large number of participants who are participating from different areas yes sumati you can ask the question we are unmuting you yes doctor sir thank you sir we are very thankful that you have spared your valuable time for enriching us on such an important topic sir my question is that considering the dynamism which the legislature as well as the judiciary has shown uh by interpreting these family laws so uh shouldn't the provisions which have been dealt under section 493 and 496 we also made gender neutral as in not only a man even the woman should be held uh but um liable for inducing a man to go habit with him and then have sexual intercourse with him why only a man so you are asking in relation to offensive the section 496 493 and 496 it is a man by deceit or by a friend and go for a sexual intercourse with the woman this is akin to the offense of a rape therefore it is not women will induce it will not come all right one i probably give her demon in there to see whether she was there she wanted who's asking Vibha demon i'm seeing whether she's there or not because she's quite interesting all in this and then uh if there's one of the ishmukh probably from Maharashtra i can ask if she can if she wants to pitch in something uh i will unmute her it's her choice so we take it as the last question yes Vibha we have unmuted she's from uh high court she's a vibrant lawyer all right the way she will pose the question you will come to know that she's very vibrant oh no no it was a very informative session no questions in fact i wanted to make a request let's call it once again oh thank you so nice of you hello informative let's have it once again because it is very helpful for a mediation also so kind of you ma'am thank you sir yes thank you so nice of you but thanks to everybody for a patient healing to a judge we go off the have a good day and good times ahead sir let me uh just uh the formal so we are uh all obliged that the insights given to uh given by your good sir you have issued the topic at the first brush when we had asked you and invited you to come on the topic on the first brush when the invite was prepared it looked as if it's we will just have one clip then they say whenever there is anything one can have a 1d view 2d view 3d view as but as as we know all we see 5d movies 70 movies the same way i was just jotting down what topics you have covered in in a short time i saw that you have covered by gammy adultery uh gifts suicide alienations and all such issues which were covered it is only a person with the immense knowledge can cover these issues and especially who has a good professional practice before being elevated to the judge and a person who has such immense knowledge sharing on a platform is always encouraging to the participants because the cobwebs which are in the mind of anyone can only be dispelled either by a lot and a lot of reading but in a capsule form as my father used to say the capsule is very small but if you have a pain in the body it can remove the entire pain in the same form if a person with a great acumen legal acumen and knowledge gives a capsule lecture it's a this it acts like anything and the entire body is rejuvenated it's just like a multivitamin and anti-detox given by you are much encouraging to us but we all know the time time is the essence and we can only request that on this platform we meet again though undoubtedly we meet time and again but it's a common platform where pan india people and sometimes even people from abroad like i was seeing questions people asking and our eyes etc it shows that people are taking keen interest and we are live on the facebook uh people have just latched up they thought a judge who has got the knowledge of Punjab and i quote Calcutta high court as well as Rajasthan high court nothing better could have been given so before going after a quite large number of days we are just asking two three tips from your side for a lawyer so what is your take that what a young lawyer should do one like i know you personally that you had a lot of struggle but the grit the wit and the knowledge made made a mark what is your take how the young lawyer should make the thing because there's a lot of struggle they say this you are always lonely on the top but at the bottom there's too much so you have to create your own niche how to do that say vikas ji this is very topic very clear to me it requires a one separate session now how to young lawyers should struggle make mark or they should come up in the profession what is required since i came from a first generation i started coming to the boards on the cycle the god has been kind i was fortunate to make a come up in the profession in my own humble way but compared to Punjab and Haryana compared to Calcutta i find that members of the bar senior council at the Rajasthan are they require more into it i if anybody's hearing i will request Rajasthan bar association to have an exclusive session for the young lawyers and for the young lawyer should come up it should be in a very private it should not be recorded because what you can say to the young lawyers who come in the profession can't be set in the public platform this is something you know it is a kind of hypocrisy says we say that hard work we have been doing this i've been doing look at this this is not when you speak with the young lawyers you speak with it holding no bars it should be an introduction we should not be recorded and it's a very dear to me and i feel that the my members of the bar at Rajasthan young lawyers i'm not fortunate as the lawyers in Punjab and Calcutta are they require more into it moving has to hold to come up in the profession i will love to do so but it should be in private so you know we think all good things like this like this is not a profession this is a profession has its own limitations you come from the family background you come with something hard to make it mark it's a different something where a lot of blunt speeches required sir point well taken but holding no bars i should address the junior council hope sometime Rajasthan bar give me an opportunity to share my views sir two points well taken from what what you said that you said the god was kind enough but some somewhere down the line while as a student and in life one always says that god helped those who helped himself all right you're insisting i narrate one anecdote jina was asked what is the secret of his success in the profession he said firstly luck secondly luck and finally luck so you may say that you succeed in profession by luck but what is luck luck is maximum opportunities how the luck will lady luck will smile upon you if you get maximum opportunities say if a batsman get hundred innings to play he has got hundred opportunities therefore for a lack you must get maximum opportunities how you get maximum opportunities you have maximum acquaintances more acquaintances you have more vibrancy you are you will get more opportunities more luck to smile this is something topic which requires no hold bar i can since i've come out of the on poverty on my struggle i want to share with the young lawyers and i have a special affection corner with the young lawyers of rajasthan i want to share with them human opportunity holding no bar i will come out but it should not be recorded so another thing what you said you want something to be taken on private the large number of participants from panjab and i are also listening we will definitely go with the session let this go with etc where all that social distancing you know lawyers of panjab and anaheim court are privileged they come from the affluent section of the society they are having so many privileges when they step into bar which is not there at other places all right thank you this is a private discussion say with a good note only one point i will say as you said because i learned from you that a good lawyer is one who knows what to present before the judge and want not to present let there be one presentation where it is no bar now will i say that only bar in bar criminal lawyer must know what not to speak what not to say the problem with the criminal lawyer is he speaks too much a criminal lawyer in court must know what not to say what not to speak all right let's hang out right sir thank you it was a wonderful session the insights given by you guys have a good day and good times ahead okay and tomorrow we have a session by Mr. Puneet Bali and Yovrat Singh sports law and beyond just be connected with us tomorrow it would be a fascinating session from a senior advocate giving his insights on sports law and to hear the other sides the challenging etc what how his career went it was a fantastic it will be a fantastic session just be connected let's see how the six sixes which he played in the batch goes in the session tomorrow stay connected stay blessed thank you