More BK Lies: Shivani Named in "Homebreaker" Court Case

Husband watching Brahmakumari videos, not consummating marriage is not cruelty: Karnataka High Court.

A accused her husband of constantly watching videos of the Brahma Kumaris' Honeypot, Sister Shivani, and refusing to consummate their marriage. In this case, I think the court was poorly informed & infatuations with Sister Shivani, idealised as a sort of "perfect" spiritual woman, constitutes an infidelity within the marriage relationship. One that the BKWSU knowingly exploits.

What's notable about it is that the couple had only been married for only 28 days, so what was going on? Why was he marrying in the first place? See at the end, he admitted that he never had any intention of making love to his wife, so he & his family lied to her about what was going on. It's not the first time that Shivani's been accused of being a homebreaker.

Was it a case of a family trying to marry off a son for the sake of the wife's dowry?
Or perhaps just to gain a free house servant?
Or was he forcing into by his family, for the sake of normalcy?

It would be interesting to know if his family were also BK adherents.

We can be sure his interest did not arise within the first 28 days of marriage. Another young woman's life damaged.

The Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a man by his ex-wife who alleged that his refusal to consummate their marriage amounted to cruelty under the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The High Court noted that failure to consummate a marriage does not amount to cruelty under the definition of section 498A of the IPC, even though it amounts to cruelty as a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, as per a report in BW Legal World.

The woman had filed a criminal case under Section 498A of the IPC alleging that her husband’s refusal to consummate the marriage amounted to cruelty. She also sought annulment of the marriage after only 28 days. The couple had gotten married in December 2019.

The woman, in her complaint, said her husband was a follower of the Brahma Kumaris – a spiritual movement that advocates for a celibate lifestyle. She said her husband was always watching videos of one of the Brahma Kumari Sisters, Shivani, and also encouraged her to watch the videos, according to The Hindu.

She also claimed her husband told her he never intended to have a physical relationship with her.

Two more stories offers a few more insights. In one, the wife suspected the role of the in-laws in her complaint, saying that they wanted her to bring articles such as a refrigerator as a dowry, and said her husband wanted to remain celibate, being a follower of the Brahma Kumaris spiritual movement. Given that they were "elderly", I am suspect more than they just wanted a woman to look after their son.

Divorce granted for ‘cruelty’ under Marriage Act, no case under IPC: Karnataka High Court

The wife’s counsel contended that the marriage was annulled in November 2022 but she wanted to pursue criminal proceedings as it amounted to cruelty.

BENGALURU: Criminal proceedings of ‘cruelty’ under Section 498A IPC cannot be permitted to continue against the husband when a decree of divorce has been granted to the wife on the basis of ‘cruelty’ due to non-consummation of marriage, defined under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Karnataka High Court said.

Justice M Nagaprasanna passed the order while allowing a petition filed by a 33-year-old techie with a reputed firm in the city and his aged parents, questioning criminal proceedings against them under Section 498(A) IPC by the wife, a technical supporter in a firm. “The only allegation is that the husband is a follower of Brahmakumari; always watched videos of a certain Sister Shivani, a Brahmakumari; got inspired watching the videos; maintained that love is never getting physical but should be soul to soul.

He never intended to have a physical relationship with his wife. This would undoubtedly amount to cruelty due to non-consummation of marriage under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, and not cruelty as defined under Section 498A of the IPC. It is on the basis of such cruelty that a decree of divorce is granted to the complainant-wife and on the same basis, criminal proceedings cannot be permitted to be continued against the husband,” the court noted.

The couple got married in December 2019 and their relationship turned sour within 28 days of their marriage. She walked out of her husband’s house and registered a complaint with JP Nagar police under Section 498A of IPC and Section 12(a)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking annulment of marriage on the grounds of cruelty.

The marriage was annulled by the family court as the wife proved it is a voidable marriage owing to the impotency of the husband. Meanwhile, police filed a chargesheet against the husband and his parents, who knocked on the doors of the high court. The petitioners’ counsel argued that the parents had been dragged into the case without reason. Also, allegations against the husband would not qualify as an offence under Section 198A.

The wife’s counsel contended that the marriage was annulled in November 2022 but she wanted to pursue criminal proceedings as it amounted to cruelty. The court said it was alleged the husband played Sister Shivani’s preachings day and night and forced his wife to watch them too. Therefore, the allegation is that being a follower of Brahmakumari Samaja, he could not have married her and this amounts to cruelty. Since her in-laws never stayed with the couple, the chargesheet does not make out charges of cruelty for dowry, the HC added.