Report On Internship With "Legal Practitioner" Vadodara

REPORT ON INTERNSHIP
with
“Legal Practitioner”
VADODARA
SUBMITTED BY
VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI
LLB (Special)
Faculty of Law
The M. S. University of Baroda
Vadodara
[Year2020 – 2021]
PRN No. 2018033800029694
Seat No.552167
VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 1 of 48

Index
Serial Particulars On page Number
Number
1 Acknowledgement 3
2 Certificate Of Internship 4
3 Introduction of Organization 5
4 Objective Of Organization 6
5 Daily Report 8
6 Study undertaken 47
7 Conclusion 48

Acknowledgement
I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards
to Mr.Himatsinh U Parmar for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant
encouragement throughout the internship. The blessing, help and guidance given
by him time to time shall carry me a long way in the journey of life on which I
am about to embark.
I want to express my gratitude to all the people who have given their
support in making this experience wonderful.
I owe thanks to my parents, family and friends whose love and affection
strengthened me during my internship. My sincere thanks to all classmates and
other interns for their support during the internship.
We extend our gratitude towards all those people who have directly or
indirectly helped me throughout my internship.

Introduction of Organisation
Mr.Himatsinh U Parmar is an advocate since 20 years. He is a
very experienced advocate and Notary at vadodara. He has expertise
in the fields of Civil Matter specially Contracts, Negotiable
Instruments, income Tax, GST, Company Matters. He has been
practicing for more than 20 years in Civil and Criminal Matters.
Mr.Himatsinh U Parmar have a good communication and Drafting
Skill in litigation.

Objective of Organisation
 Always strives for Principle of Natural Justice.
 Justice should be available to all without any discrimination.
 Legal assistance must be reach to needy.
 To provide best legal services to the litigants at a very reasonable
cost and that to under one roof.
 To impart legal education to poor litigants.
 To encourage the young lawyers to follow the Principles of
Professional ethics.
 To produce the hard working, fair, intelligent Advocates as well as
Judicial Officers.
 To teach new law aspirants an art of advocacy
 To educate people about their Rights and Duties assigned by
Constitution Of India through open discussion, Conferences and
meetings.
 To make efforts to maintain the dignity of Legal Profession of
Advocates and Judicial System.

Concern law related to study
 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
 THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.
 THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT,1872.
 THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,1955.
 THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.
 THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE ACT,1947
 THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881
 HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1956

Daily Report
Day 1
On first day of our internship we went to the office at 10:15 am. We met
Mr.Himatsinh U Parmar for our internship programme. Our advocate sir
welcomed us with grettings and after welcoming us he asked us about our
educational qualification and experiences.
As he has expertise in the fields of Civil Matter specially Contracts, Negotiable

Instruments, income Tax, GST, Company Matters. He has been practicing for
more than 20 years in Civil and Criminal Matters. He advised us to start our
study with The Negotiable Instrumental Act, 1881 and The Indian Contract
Act ,1872.
After that sir gave over view about The Negotiable Instrumental Act, 1881 and
The Indian Contract Act ,1872.

Day 2
Today we reached at office and we discussed about negotiable instrument and

we studied Section 138. This section is about cheque bounce and whenever
cheque is dishonored by bank then payee give notice under this section to
drawer. This section runs as follow:
Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
18
[ 138 Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account. —
Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a
banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that
account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is
returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to
the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds
the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with
that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall,
without prejudice to any other provisions of this Act, be punished with
imprisonment for 1 9 [a term which may be extended to two years], or with fine
which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both: Provided that
nothing contained in this section shall apply unless—
(a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from
the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is
earlier;
(b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be,
makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice
in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, 2 0 [within thirty days] of the receipt of

information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid;
and
(c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of
money to the payee or, as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the
cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice.
Explanation.— For the purposes of this section, “debt or other liability” means a
legally enforceable debt or other liability.]

Day 3
Today is holiday.

Day 4
On this day we reached at office on 10:30 am. Today analise sample
notice under Section 138. Sir explained us that in notice we first mentioned
about the transaction for which cheque was given then legal liability this are two
general part of every notice under this section.
After dishonor of cheque payee has to give notice under this section with
in 30 days from the date of dishonor as mentiond in section 138(b).
The main part of this section is 15 days time which was given for
repayment of said amount. This 15 days of time mandatory as it was in section
138(c).
If drawer fails to repay the amount with in such time period i.e 15 days
than he is liable for offence under section 138. Drawer will liable to be
prosecuted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 as
amended up to date under which drawer liable to be punished with imprisonment
which may extend to two year or with fine which may extend to twice the
amount of cheque or with both.

Day 5
On this day we reached at office on 10:30 am. We did some office work
and we saw sample formate of notice under section 138 and draft petition for
same section.
Main points covered under notice:

 Name and address of drawer and drawee
 Legal liability
 Bank memo
 15 days time frame
 Demand of payment
 Jurisdiction of court
Main points covered under draft petition:

 Name and address of drawer and drawee
 Legal liability
 Bank memo
 Original / copy of cheque
 15 days notice
 Jurisdiction of court
 Limitation
We end todays discussion and had our lunch. Than we take permission for leave
to home.

Day 6
We reached at office around 11 o’clock. Sir gave us more detailed

information with regard to limitation for notice, petition and money suit.
Section 142 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
142 Cognizance of offences. —Notwithstanding anything contained in the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)—
(a) no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under section 138
except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may be,
the holder in due course of the cheque;
(b) such complaint is made within one month of the date on which the cause of
action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to section 138:
[Provided that the cognizance of a complaint may be taken by the Court after
the prescribed period, if the complainant satisfies the Court that he had
sufficient cause for not making a complaint within such period.]
(c) no court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate

of the first class shall try any offence punishable under section 138.
As given under section 142 the limitation period for filing complain is 30
days from the date of offence under section 138 (c) of negotiable intstrument
Act,1881.
Than sir further told us that if once period of this limitation ends. than we
cannot file petition under this section. Unless the court may permit for same.
Other way to recover the said amount is under CPC as mentioned in procedure
for money suit.
For money suit limitation period is 3 years from the date of legal liability
arises.
Day 7

We reached at office around 11 o’clock. Today sir discuss some practice
aspect regarding The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The main technical
aspect with regards to cheque bounce cases as follows….
 If drawee and holder in due course fail to give notice of dishonor of

cheque as mentioned in 138 of NI Act than drawee and holder in due
course may present such dishonored cheque one more time with bank.
Than bank return such cheque as dishonored and one more time drawee
has fresh limitation period for giving notice under section 138 of NI Act.
 After end of Limitation period court may condone delay if same

application is made before court and court is satisfy that there is reason
for such delay. Than court may permit or allowed the complain under 138
of NI Act.
Day 8

We reached at office around 11 o’clock. Today sir discuss Landmark cases
regarding The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
 In the case of Meters & Instruments Private Limited & Anr. v. Kanchan
Mehta, the Apex Court had made some remarkable observations regarding
dishonor of cheque cases and also issued directions for speedy disposal of
cheque cases Section 138 of NI Act.
 Other Directions Issued by the Court in the case In every complaint

under Section 138 of NI Act, it may be desirable that the
complainant gives his bank account number and if possible e-mail
ID of the accused. If e-mail ID is available with the Bank where the
accused has an account, such Bank, on being required, should
furnish such e-mail ID to the payee of the cheque.
 In every summons, issued to the accused, it may be indicated that if

the accused deposits the specified amount, which should be assessed
by the Court having regard to the cheque amount and interest/cost,
by a specified date, the accused need not appear unless required and
proceedings may be closed subject to any valid objection of the
complainant.
 If the accused complies with such summons and informs the Court
and the complainant by e-mail, the Court can ascertain the
objection, if any, of the complainant and close the proceedings
unless it becomes necessary to proceed with the case.

 In such a situation, the accused’s presence can be required, unless
the presence is otherwise exempted subject to such conditions as
may be considered appropriate. The accused, who wants to contest
the case, must be required to disclose specific defence for such
contest.
 In case the trial is to proceed, it will be open to the Court to explore

the possibility of settlement. It will also be open to the Court to
consider the provisions of plea bargaining. Subject to this, the trial
can be on day to day basis and endeavour must be to conclude it
within six months.
 The guilty must be punished at the earliest as per law and the one
who obeys the law need not be held up in proceedings for long
unnecessarily.
We end todays discussion and had our lunch. Than we take permission for leave
to home.
Day 9
We reached at office around 11 o’clock. Today sir discuss another Landmark
cases regarding The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
n R. Vijayan vs Baby & Anr , the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as follows
(Para 17) :
‘We are conscious of the fact that proceedings under section 138 of the Act
cannot be treated as civil suits for recovery of the cheque amount with interest.
We are also conscious of the fact that compensation awarded under section
357(1)(b) is not intended to be an elaborate exercise taking note of interest etc.
Our observations are necessitated due to the need to have uniformity and
consistency in decision making. In same type of cheque dishonour cases, after
convicting the accused, if some courts grant compensation and if some other
courts do not grant compensation, the inconsistency, though perfectly acceptable
in the eye of law, will give rise to certain amount of uncertainty in the minds of
litigants about the functioning of courts. Citizens will not be able to arrange or
regulate their affairs in a proper manner as they will not know whether they
should simultaneously file a civil suit or not. The problem is aggravated having
regard to the fact that in spite of section 143(3) of the Act requiring the
complaints in regard to cheque dishonour cases under section 138 of the Act to
be concluded within six months from the date of the filing of the complaint,
such cases seldom reach finality before three or four years let alone six months.
These cases give rise to complications where civil suits have not been filed
within three years on account of the pendency of the criminal cases. While it is
not the duty of criminal courts to ensure that successful complainants get the
cheque amount also, it is their duty to have uniformity and consistency, with
other courts dealing with similar cases’’.
As was held by the Hon’ble Apex court in R.Vijayan’s case,
(i) the provision for levy of fine which is linked to the cheque amount and
may extend to twice the amount of the cheque ( section 138) thereby

rendering section 357 (3) virtually infructuous in so far as cheque
dishonour cases.
(ii) The provision enabling a First Class Magistrate to levy fine exceeding
Rs.5,000/- ( section 143) notwithstanding the ceiling to the fine, as
Rs.5,000/- imposed by section 29(2) of the Code;
(iii) The provision relating to mode of service of summons ( section 144) as
contrasted from the mode prescribed for criminal cases in section 62 of
the Code;
(iv) The provision for taking evidence of the complainant by affidavit
( section 145) which is more prevalent in civil proceedings, as
contrasted from the procedure for recording evidence in the Code;
(v) The provision making all offences punishable under section 138 of the
Act compoundable. Conclusion:
As was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in R. Vijayan vs Baby & Anr
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1902 OF 2011,(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.2586
of 2007), one other solution is a further amendment to the provision of
Chapter XVII so that in all cases where there is a conviction, there should be
a consequential levy of fine of an amount sufficient to cover the cheque
amount and interest thereon at a fixed rate of 9% per annum interest,
followed by award of such sum as compensation from the fine amount. This
would lead to uniformity in decisions, avoid multiplicity of proceedings (one
for enforcing civil liability and another for enforcing criminal liability) and
achieve the object of Chapter XVII of the Act, which is to increase the
credibility of the instrument. This is however a matter for the Law
Commission of India to consider.

Day 10
Today is holiday.

Day 11
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. We reached at Panigate police

station for bail of accused person on charge of Theft. Sir discuss the
provision with regards to bail. Bail can be taken from police station or from
the court. In bailabele offence person can get bail bond from police station
itself. In non-bailable offence court may grant bail to accused person.
Section 436 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973
436. In what cases bail to be taken.
(1) When any person other than a person accused of a non- bailable offence is
arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station,
or appears or is brought before a Court, and is prepared at any time while in the
custody of such officer or at any stage of the proceeding before such Court to
give bail, such person shall be released on bail: Provided that such officer or
Court, if he or it thinks fit, may, instead of taking bail from such person,
discharge him on his executing a bond without sureties for his appearance as
hereinafter provided: Provided further that nothing in this section shall be
deemed to affect the provisions of sub- section (3) of section 116 or section
446A
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub- section (1), where a person has
failed to comply with the conditions of the bail- bond as regards the time and
place of attendance, the Court may refuse to release him on bail, when on a
subsequent occasion in the same case he appears before the Court or is brought
in custody and any such refusal shall be without prejudice to the powers of the
Court to call upon any person bound by such bond to pay the penalty thereof
under section 446.
437. When bail may be taken in case of non- bailable offence.
(1) When any person accused of, or suspected of, the commission of any non-
bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge
of a police station or appears or is brought before a Court other than the High
Court or Court of Session, he may be released on bail, but-
(i) such person shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for
believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or
imprisonment for life;

(ii) such person shall not be so released if such offence is a cognizable offence
and he had been previously convicted of an offence punishable with death,
imprisonment for life or imprisonment for seven years or more, or he had been
previously convicted on two or more occasions of a non- bailable and cognizable
offence: Provided that the Court may direct that a person referred to in clause (i)
or clause (ii) be released on bail it such person is under the age of sixteen years
or is a woman or is sick or infirm: Provided further that the Court may also
direct that a person referred to in clause (ii) be released on bail if it is satisfied
that It is just and proper so to do for any other special reason: Provided also that
the mere fact that an accused person may be required for being identified by
witnesses during investigation shall not be sufficient ground for refusing to
grant bail if he is otherwise entitled to be released on bail and gives an
undertaking that he shall comply with such directions as may be given by the
Court.
(2) If it appears to such officer or Court at any stage of the investigation,
inquiry or trial, as the case may be, that there are not reasonable grounds for
believing that the accused has committed a non- bailable offence, but that there
are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into his guilt the accused shall, subject
to the provisions of section 446A and pending such inquiry, be released on bail]
or at the discretion of such officer or Court, on the execution by him of a bond
without sureties for his appearance as hereinafter provided.
(3) When a person accused or suspected of the commission of an offence

punishable with imprisonment which may extend to seven years or more or of an
offence under Chapter VI, Chapter XVI or Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal
Code or abetment of, or conspiracy or attempt to commit, any such offence, is
released on bail under sub- section (1), the Court may impose any condition
which the Court considers necessary-
(a) in order to ensure that such person shall attend in accordance with the
conditions of the bond executed under this Chapter, or
(b) in order to ensure that such person shall not commit an offence similar to the
offence of which he is accused or of the commission of which he is suspected, or
(c) otherwise in the interests of justice.
(4) An officer or a Court releasing any person on bail under sub- section (1) or
sub- section (2), shall record in writing his or its 1 reasons or special seasons]
for so doing.

(5) Any Court which has released a person on bail under sub- section (1) or sub-
section (2), may, if it considers it necessary so to do, direct that such person be
arrested and commit him to custody.
(6) If, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any
non- bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the
first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in
custody during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the
satisfaction of the Magistrate, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the
Magistrate otherwise directs.
(7) If, at any time after the conclusion of the trial of a person accused of a non-
bailable offence and before judgment is delivered, the Court is of opinion that
there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of any
such offence, it shall release the accused, if he is in custody, on the execution
by him of a bond without sureties for his appearance to hear judgment delivered.

Day 12
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. We reached at Panigate police

station. For bail of person pervious day arrested on charge of theft. Because on
previous day no one come to become suretie. So today we leave for office after
completion of formality for bail of accused person.
After we reached at office sir discuss some cases related to bail. There is
popular line on this point “Granting bail is the rule and jail is an exception”.
ASLAM BABALAL DESAI v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
(1992)
In general, grounds for bail cancellation are interference or attempt to interfere

with the due course of administration of Justice, or evasion or attempt to evade
the course of justice or abuse of the liberty granted to him. When the accused is
granted bail under Section 167(2) for the prosecution being at default for not
completing the investigation within 60 days after the defect being cured by
chargesheet being filed, the bail may be deemed to be cancelled on the ground
that reasonable grounds do exist for the accused committing a non-bailable
offence. It is necessary for him to be arrested and taken into custody.
Strong grounds are necessary to cancel the bail and are to be made out in the
charge-sheet.
DEEPAK KUMAR SAH v. THE STATE OF BIHAR
(2015)
The petitioner was in jail for 9 months. The complainant had became pregnant
after having consensual physical relations with him. Hence, the petitioner is
liable to maintain the lady and at the time of delivery needed to be with her.
Hence, Patna High Court granted bail to him but only on the condition that he
had to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount

each to the satisfaction of the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Naugachia.
SANTOSH KUMAR MANDAL v. STATE
(2016)
The Court reiterated on bail under POCSO Act. It held that the offence which is
punishable under Section 12 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual offences
Act is a non-bailable offence. Thus, it the accused cannot claim bail under that
section exercising his right to claim bail.

Day 13
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. Sir was not there he was
outstation for some work. So we read bar act of Criminal procudere code and
Indian penal code only. And left for home after 2 pm.

Day 14
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock on this day sir discuss some
new topic on mutual divorce. If both party to marriage agree to get divorce
than they can file mutual petition under 13B of Hindu mariaage Act, 1956.
13B Divorce by mutual consent. —
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by
a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a
marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnised before or after the
commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976)*, on
the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or
more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually
agreed that the marriage should be dissolved.
(2) On the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the
date of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub-section (1) and not
later than eighteen months after the said date, if the petition is not withdrawn in
the meantime, the court shall, on being satisfied, after hearing the parties and
after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that a marriage has been solemnised
and that the averments in the petition are true, pass a decree of divorce
declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree.]

Day 15
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock on this day we attend online

proceeding which was for mutual divorce at vadodara court. Judge asked both
husband and wife for their final call whether they want to continue their
marriage or they want divorce. Than both party agree for divorce and judge
of family court gives order for same.

Day 16
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock on this day sir told us to read
various ground which are available for divorce as given under Hindu
Marriage Act, 1956.
Section 13 is the foundation section that clearly states the grounds of
divorce. These grounds are adultery, cruelty, Desertion, conversion, insanity,
leprosy, venereal disease, renunciation, and presumption of death. Thus on
these grounds divorce is bound to take place between the two legally married
couples. Section 13(A) also provides a divorce through mutual consent where
both the parties don’t want to continue a married life, thus mutually they
accept the fact and consents to have a divorce.

Day 17
Today is holiday.

Day 18
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock on this day sir asked us one
question. What is cooling period in divorce case? Than we start our
discussions on that topic.
What is the cooling-off period?
In Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the couples in marriage seek
divorce by mutual consent through filing a petition in the court through a
divorce lawyer. The Consensual Divorce states that both partners agree with
peaceful separation. The dissolution of marriage through mutual consent is a
straightforward method to dissolve it legally. Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 states that for a statutory interregnum understanding, a
cooling period of six months between the first and the last motion for divorce by
consensual consent to explore the possibility of settlement and cohabitation.
That statutory period is termed as the cooling period.
When can it be waived off?
In the case of Amardeep Singh v Harveen Kaur, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held
that, in the case of mutual divorce, the minimum cooling period of 6 months may
be waived. Section 13B(1) concerns the Court’s jurisdiction and deals with the
petition ‘s sustainability so that it can not be abolished. Section 13B(2), though,
is administrative and should be repealed after having examined the details and
conditions in each situation where there is a little possibility of reconciliation.
The usage of Article 142, which was historically used by the Courts to suspend
the time of situations of exceptional circumstances, is not mandatory. In
Amardeep’s case, the court remarked that,
“In order to waive off the statutory waiting period of 6 months under Section
13B (2), the court needs to consider the following before making a decision: The
statutory period of six months specified in Section 13B(2), in addition to the

statutory period of one year under Section 13B(1) of separation of parties is
already over before the first motion itself; All efforts for mediation/conciliation
including efforts in terms of Order XXXII A Rule 3 CPC/Section 23(2) of the
Act/Section 9 of the Family Courts Act to reunite the parties have failed and
there is no likelihood of success in that direction by any further efforts; the
parties have genuinely settled their differences including alimony, custody of a
child or any other pending issues between the parties; the waiting period will
only prolong their agony.” In these situations, one week after the first petition,
the waiver application can be submitted, providing reasons for the waiver
request. The Court may exercise its control regarding the second-period waiver.
In other words, The Supreme Court held that the minimum cooling period of six
months for granting the decree of divorce under the Hindu law can be waived by
a trial court if there was no possibility of cohabitation between an estranged
couple.
The 1955 Hindu Marriage Act provides for a statutory cooling period of six
months between the first and the last motion for seeking divorce by mutual
consent to explore the possibility of settlement and cohabitation.

Day 19
outstation for some work. So we read bar act of Hindu Marriage Act,1956
only. And we left for home after 2 pm.

Day 20
outstation for some work. Attend online proceeding of hon’able Gujarat high
Court. And left for home after 2 pm.

Day 21
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. On this day sir made one draft
on mutual divorce we seen some important point which must be ther in all
divorce draft. Sir teach us all the points in detail like jurisdiction of court ,
marriage date of parties, time of marriage, cause of divorce etc. And than
After left for home after 2 pm.

Day 22
outstation for some work. So we read bar act of Hindu Marriage Act,1956
only. And we left for home after 2 pm.

Day 23
outstation for some work. After sir called us and tell us to draft one demand
notice under section 138 of The Negotiable Instrument Act,1881. And we do
the same. This is the first legal work of us which than appreciated by sir.

Day 24

Day 25
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. Sir told us to go panigate

police station and get bail of person on charge of grivious hurt. Than we
called two surety for bail of person. Police office take addhar card of both
the surety and property card ( copy ) and than release accused person on bail.
And left for home after 2 pm.

Day 26

Day 27
Today is holiday.

Day 28
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. Sir tech us one most important
and routine topic of maintenance to wife. The provision given in Criminal
Proceudre Code.
125. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents.
(1) If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain-
(a) his wife, unable to maintain herself, or
(b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to
maintain itself, or
(c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has
attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental
abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself, or
(d) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself, a Magistrate of

the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to
make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father
or mother, at such monthly rate not exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole,
as such Magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the
Magistrate may from time to time direct: Provided that the Magistrate may order
the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such
allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the
husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient
means. Explanation.- For the purposes of this Chapter,-
(a) " minor" means a person who, under the provisions of the Indian Majority
Act, 1875 (9 of 1875 ); is deemed not to have attained his majority;
(b) " wife" includes a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a
divorce from, her husband and has not remarried.
(2) Such allowance shall be payable from the date of the order, or, if so ordered,
from the date of the application for maintenance.
(3) If any person so ordered fails without sufficient cause to comply with the
order, any such Magistrate may, for every breach of the order, issue a warrant
for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines, and may
sentence such person, for the whole or any part of each month' s allowances

remaining unpaid after the execution of the warrant, to imprisonment for a term
which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made: Provided that
no warrant shall be issued for the recovery of any amount due under this section
unless application be made to the Court to levy such amount within a period of
one year from the date on which it became due: Provided further that if such
person offers to maintain his wife on condition of her living with him, and she
refuses to live with him, such
Magistrate may consider any grounds of refusal stated by her, and may make an
order under this section notwithstanding such offer, if he is satisfied that there
is just ground for so doing. Explanation.- If a husband has contracted marriage
with another woman or keeps a mistress, it shall be considered to be just ground
for his wife' s refusal to live with him.
(4) No Wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance from her husband under
this section if she is living in adultery, or if, without any sufficient reason, she
refuses to live with her husband, or if they are living separately by mutual
consent.
(5) On proof that any wife in whose favour an order has been made under this
section is living in adultery, or that without sufficient reason she refuses to live
with her husband, or that they are living separately by mutual consent, the
Magistrate shall cancel the order.

Day 29
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. Sir told us landmark case

related to maintenance.
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum [1985 SCALE 767 = 1985 SCR 844 = 1985
SCC 556 = AIR 1985 SC 945], commonly referred to as the Shah Bano case, was a
controversial maintenance lawsuit in India, in which the Supreme Court delivered a judgment
favouring maintenance given to an aggrieved divorced Muslim woman.
Case name: Shailja & Anr. v. Khobanna
In this case, the Supreme Court made a remarkable observation by stating that merely because
the wife is capable of earning it is not a reason to reduce the maintenance awarded to her and
said that whether a wife is capable of earning and is actually earning are two different factors.
The Supreme Court answered this question in the case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey
Chowdhury Nee Nandy by holding that 25% of the husband’s net salary would be just and
proper as maintenance to wife.
The Supreme Court while deciding the review petition made reference to the case of Dr.
Kulbhushan v. Raj Kumari & Anr, wherein it was held that 25% of the husband’s net salary
would be just and proper to be awarded as maintenance to the respondent-wife.
Sir also told us that under Code of criminal Procedure any woman, irrespective of their religion,
can demand Maintenance from her husband, if he has sufficient means neglects or refuses
to maintain, because this is Genral act or central Act. One can demand
maintenance from their personal law also.

Day 30
We reached at office around 10:30 o’clock. This was last day of our internship
sir told us to ready daily updates on legal points and sir also helped us to
prepare this report. after some time we take leave for home after 2pm.

Study undertaken
 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
 THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.
 THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT,1872.
 THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,1955.
 THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.
 THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE ACT,1947
 THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881
 HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1956

CONCLUSION
 At the ends of my internship, I has to say that this profession is all about
to interpretation and to make update our self with regards to law &
procedure.
 Mainly in this term of internship I observed the procedure and daily work
of an individual lawyer. Which inspire me to work with passion and fairly
in the law field.
 Lastly I conclude that an individual lawyer will become self-dependent.
Here anindividual advocate knows each and every aspect regarding the
case. He is a sole responsible and liable for whatever the outcome of the
case. An individual practice in the law field gives a knowledge of
proceeding of case at every stage.
 This one month gave me a wonderful experience. We came to contact with
many people during the training. We got to know many laws like CrPC,
CPC, IPC,Evidence law,, etc. which are essential for us in this field.

Report On Internship With "Legal Practitioner" Vadodara

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Report On Internship With "Legal Practitioner" Vadodara

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPORT ON INTERNSHIP

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 1 of 48

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 2 of 48

to Mr.Himatsinh U Parmar for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant

support in making this experience wonderful.

strengthened me during my internship. My sincere thanks to all classmates and

other interns for their support during the internship.

indirectly helped me throughout my internship.

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 3 of 48

Mr.Himatsinh U Parmar is an advocate since 20 years. He is a

very experienced advocate and Notary at vadodara. He has expertise

in the fields of Civil Matter specially Contracts, Negotiable

Instruments, income Tax, GST, Company Matters. He has been

practicing for more than 20 years in Civil and Criminal Matters.

Mr.Himatsinh U Parmar have a good communication and Drafting

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 5 of 48

 Justice should be available to all without any discrimination.

 Legal assistance must be reach to needy.

 To provide best legal services to the litigants at a very reasonable

cost and that to under one roof.

 To impart legal education to poor litigants.

 To encourage the young lawyers to follow the Principles of

 To produce the hard working, fair, intelligent Advocates as well as

 To teach new law aspirants an art of advocacy

 To educate people about their Rights and Duties assigned by

Constitution Of India through open discussion, Conferences and

 To make efforts to maintain the dignity of Legal Profession of

Advocates and Judicial System.

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 6 of 48

 THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.

 THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT,1872.

 THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,1955.

 THE INDIAN PENAL CODE.

 THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE ACT,1947

 THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT, 1881

 HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1956

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 7 of 48

As he has expertise in the fields of Civil Matter specially Contracts, Negotiable

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 8 of 48

Today we reached at office and we discussed about negotiable instrument and

Section 138 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 9 of 48

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 10 of 48

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 11 of 48

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 12 of 48

Main points covered under notice:

Main points covered under draft petition:

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 13 of 48

We reached at office around 11 o’clock. Sir gave us more detailed

Section 142 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

142 Cognizance of offences. —Notwithstanding anything contained in the

(c) no court inferior to that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 15 of 48

 If drawee and holder in due course fail to give notice of dishonor of

 After end of Limitation period court may condone delay if same

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 16 of 48

 Other Directions Issued by the Court in the case In every complaint

 In every summons, issued to the accused, it may be indicated that if

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 17 of 48

 In case the trial is to proceed, it will be open to the Court to explore

As was held by the Hon’ble Apex court in R.Vijayan’s case,

VALA RASHMITA KHUSHALBHAI Page 19 of 48