I. Divorce — the slowest kindness

A divorce in India is rarely a single hearing; it is a sequence of small hearings, each costing a working day. Mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 remains the most humane route: the parties must have lived separately for one year (the Supreme Court has, in Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, 2017, allowed waiver of the six-month cooling period in settled cases), file a joint petition, record statements on first motion, and again on second motion.

What the court asks for on day one

• Marriage certificate or proof of solemnisation
• Address and identity proof of both parties
• Evidence of one year’s separation
• Settlement deed — alimony, child custody, stridhan
• Two passport-size photographs attested by a notary

Contested divorce — filed under Section 13 on grounds of cruelty, adultery, desertion, conversion, mental disorder, or renunciation — typically runs three to five years. The pleadings stage alone, with interrogatories and document discovery, can consume eighteen months. Strategic advice: file for interim maintenance under Section 24 simultaneously, because the contested petition’s slow progress should not leave a dependent spouse without income.

The law does not punish a marriage for ending. It punishes the spouse who ends it without paying what they owe.

For Christians, the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 governs, and the grounds are narrower — adultery coupled with cruelty or adultery coupled with desertion. For Muslims, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 applies alongside personal law; khula, mubarat, and talaq-e-ahsan remain valid modes, and the Supreme Court’s invalidation of triple talaq in Shayara Bano (2017) makes instantaneous divorce civilly actionable.

Jurisdiction

The family court where the couple last resided together, where the wife currently resides, or where the marriage was solemnised — whichever the petitioner elects.

Indicative timeline

• Mutual consent: 6 to 18 months (cooling-off waivable)
• Contested: 3 to 5 years, sometimes longer
• Interim maintenance order: 3 to 8 months from filing

II. Cheque bounce — Section 138, NI Act

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is the most frequently invoked criminal provision in commercial India. It is, in effect, a quasi-criminal remedy for what is essentially a civil wrong: the drawer issued a cheque, the payee presented it, and the bank returned it endorsed insufficient funds.

The presumption under Section 139 is that the cheque was issued for the discharge of a legally enforceable debt. The burden of rebutting it sits firmly on the drawer.

The four-step statutory timeline

• Day 0: Cheque is dishonoured; bank issues a return memo to the payee’s bank.
• Within 30 days of receiving the memo: The payee issues a written demand notice to the drawer under Section 138(b), demanding payment within 15 days.
• 15 days from receipt of notice: The drawer must make payment. If they do not, the cause of action arises.
• Within 30 days of the cause of action: The payee files a criminal complaint before the magistrate having jurisdiction. Affidavit and list of witnesses accompany the complaint.

Jurisdiction, post the Supreme Court’s decision in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra (2014) and the 2015 amendment, sits with the court within whose local limits the branch of the bank on which the cheque was drawn is situated — not where the cheque was presented.

Punishment

Imprisonment up to two years, or fine up to twice the cheque amount, or both. Compounding is permitted under Section 147; in practice, a substantial majority of cases settle at the mediation stage, often for the principal sum with partial costs.

Defences that actually work

• The cheque was not for a legally enforceable debt (gift, security deposit, post-dated advance)
• The notice was defective — wrong address, insufficient particulars, no clear demand
• The complaint was filed beyond the 30-day window
• The signature on the cheque does not match the drawer’s specimen (requires forensic evidence)
• Material alteration on the face of the cheque under Section 87

Field note: Section 138 cases live and die on the demand notice. A poorly drafted notice — vague about the debt, undated, unsigned — is the single most common reason a strong matter collapses.

III. Money recovery — the summary suit

When the debt is undisputed and documented — a written agreement, an invoice, a delivery challan, an acknowledgement under Section 18 of the Limitation Act — the appropriate vehicle is a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. It is faster than an ordinary civil suit because the defendant’s right to defend is curtailed: they must obtain leave of court, and leave is granted only if the defence is substantial and triable.

Pre-litigation: the demand notice

A formal legal notice precedes the suit, reciting the debt, the documentary basis, and a final demand within 15 days. For commercial disputes, the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 mandates pre-institution mediation and settlement (PIMS) unless urgent interim relief is sought.

The procedure

• Plaint filed with court fee (ad valorem, capped by state law)
• Summons in summary form — defendant must enter appearance within 10 days
• Defendant applies for leave to defend; plaintiff opposes
• Court either grants leave (matter proceeds as ordinary suit) or refuses (judgment on admission)
• Decree passed; execution proceedings follow

Execution

A decree is only paper until executed. The Execution proceeding under Section 51 of the CPC allows attachment of movable and immovable property, garnishee orders against the debtor’s bank accounts, and arrest and detention in civil prison for wilful default. The Debts Recovery Tribunal, under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, handles claims above ₹20 lakh for banks and financial institutions. The SARFAESI Act, 2002 permits secured creditors to enforce collateral without court intervention.

The Limitation Act gives you three years from the date the debt becomes due. An acknowledgement under Section 18 — even a WhatsApp message that says “I will pay next month” — resets that clock.

Alternatives

• Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — for corporate debtors above the threshold, a Section 8 demand notice can trigger corporate insolvency in 14 days
• Arbitration — if the contract contains an arbitration clause, a sole arbitrator can render an award in 12 to 18 months, enforceable under Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
• Negotiable Instruments Act — when the debt is evidenced by a cheque, Section 138 is often swifter than civil recovery

IV. The Information Technology Act, 2000

The IT Act is India’s primary statute on cybercrime, electronic records, and digital signatures. It was amended substantially in 2008 — the same amendment that introduced Section 66A (later struck down in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, 2015, for unconstitutionality) and the data protection provisions later refined by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.

The offences practitioners actually file

• Section 43 / 66: Unauthorized access to a computer system, data theft, introducing malicious code
• Section 65: Tampering with source code — imprisonment up to three years or fine up to ₹2 lakh
• Section 66C: Identity fraud — using another’s digital identity, imprisonment up to three years
• Section 66D: Cheating by personation using a computer resource — up to three years
• Section 66E: Violation of privacy by capturing, publishing or transmitting images of a private area — up to three years
• Section 66F: Cyber terrorism — imprisonment for life
• Section 67: Publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form
• Section 67A: Sexually explicit material — up to five years on first conviction
• Section 72: Breach of confidentiality and privacy — up to two years

A screenshot is electronic evidence under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. The certificate is not optional; without it, the screenshot does not exist in court.

Jurisdiction

Section 46 confers jurisdiction on the Adjudicating Officer (typically the IT Secretary of the state) for claims up to ₹5 crore. Above that, the matter goes to the TDSAT. Criminal complaints are filed before the magistrate having jurisdiction over the place of the alleged offence — including, per the Supreme Court in Svasrise Polymers v. State of Telangana (2020), the place where the encrypted packet was received.

The 65B certificate

Under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, electronic evidence — WhatsApp chats, emails, server logs, screenshots — is admissible only if accompanied by a certificate from a person in a responsible position attesting to the authenticity of the device and the integrity of the process. The Supreme Court in Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) made this mandatory, and Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) reaffirmed it.

Field note: Most cybercrime complaints fail at the FIR stage because the police are unfamiliar with the IT Act. A draft complaint that cites the specific section, attaches the 65B certificate, and identifies the device’s IP address will move faster than a narrative grievance.

Interplay with other statutes

• Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 79 (cheating using electronic communication) and Section 354D (cyberstalking)
• Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 — for online indecent content
• POCSO Act, 2012 — for online child sexual abuse material
• Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 — consent, purpose limitation, and Data Principal rights