' D A I J I W O R L D






   Matrimonial |  Properties |  Jobs |  Classifieds |  Ask Doctor |  Live TV |  Sponsored Greetings |  Astrology  |   Red Chillies |  Automobile |  Music |  Tribute







      Search in


Legal Floodgates Opened For Extra-marital Sex !
By John B. Monteiro
John B. Monteiro, author and journalist, is editor of his website www.welcometoreason.com (Interactive Cerebral Challenger).

 March 25, 2010

“He that hath a wife and children hath given hostages to fortune; for they are impediments to great enterprises, either of virtue or mischief.” – Francis Bacon, English writer and philosopher (1561-1626).
 
Many have been indulging in great enterprises, including sex, outside the confines of holy matrimony. Now, supporting Bacon is Indian Supreme Court. But, first the facts.
 
Though they say that marriages are made in heaven, those who choose not to enter holy matrimony, preferring to take the increasingly fashionable live-in route and pre-marital sex , have the affirmative imprimatur of the Supreme Court of India. It has opened the legal floodgates for extra-marital sex and live-in arrangement . While hearing a petition by South Indian film actress Khushboo, a three-judge Bench of Chief Justice KG Balakrishnan and justices Deepak Verma and BS Chouhan, on March 23, 2010, observed: “When two adult people want to live together what is the offence? Does it amount to an offence? Living together is not an offence. It cannot be an offence.”
 
The apex court Bench made this observation while reserving its judgment on a special leave petition by Khushboo seeking to quash 22 criminal cases filed against her after she allegedly endorsed pre-marital sex in interviews to media in 2005. Her defence is irrelevant to the subject under discussion; but the Bench gave enough idea as to where it stands on pre-marital sex and live-in relationships. It said even Lord Krishna and Radha lived together according to mythology. It said that there is no law which prohibits live-in relationship or pre-marital sex. The judges questioned the advocates of some of the complainants and repeatedly stressed that the perceived immoral activities cannot be branded as (legal) offence.
 
Asking the complainants’ lawyers to tell the court how living-in constituted an offence and under which Section of the Indian Penal Code, the Bench said: “Living together is a right to life”. Noting that Khushboo’s views were personal, the Bench said: “How does it concern you? How is it an offence? Under which provision of the law?” When asked by the court whether any of the complainants had daughters, the response was negative, forcing the Bench to question: “Then, how are you adversely affected?”
 
It may be recalled that last year  the Supreme Court had struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code which criminalizes homosexuality to the euphoric delight of gays and lesbians. While same-sex union is a fairly recently surfaced issue, the sanctity of marriage as an institution goes back to Adam and Eve, when God created Eve by slicing Adam’s rib so that he may have a wife as companion and to ensure procreation. Old Testament articulates this: “It is not good that the man should be alone (Genesis 11 – 18) And it is also enjoined in the Bible that what God joins together, let no man put assunder. Yet, there have been subtle sniping at the institution of indissoluble bonds of holy matrimony.  Sample, for instance, the following:
 
“Marriages and hanging go by destiny;
Matches are made in heaven.”
-- Robert Burton, English writer and humorist (1576-1640).
 
“The wedlock of minds will be greater than of bodies.”
-- Gerard Didier Erasmus, writer from Holland (1465-1538).
 
“When there is marriage without love,
there will be love without marriage.”
-- Benjamin Franklin, US statesman (1706-1790).
 
“Man and wife
Coupled together for the sake of strife.”
-- Charles Churchill, English poet and satirist (1731-1764).
 
“It happens as one sees in cages: The birds which are outside despair of ever getting in, and those within are equally desirous of getting out.”
--Michael  Montaigne, French philosopher (1533-1592).
 
“Marriage is a desperate thing.”
-- John Seldon, English jurist (1584-1654).
 
“Hanging and wiving goes by destiny.”
-- William Shakespeare, English dramatic poet (1564-1616) in The Merchant of Venice.

“A world-without-end bargain.”
Shakespeare in Love’s Labour’s Lost.
 
Legal floodgates have now been opened for same-sex union, pre-marital sex and live-in relationships. What next? Group sex and switched partners?

 

John Monteiro - Recent Archives:

READ 'EXCLUSIVE ARCHIVES'
Comments on this article
jawahar, usaWednesday, June 16, 2010
since when sex and marriage are same?.  marriage was created by religious institutions. sex by every animal (including) human beings.What two adults do is their own business .and society should stick to making regulations that help people to be happy and not restrict them based on the psudo morality depending on their beliefs and religious biases or judgements. thanks to the supreme court which up holds the law.
Comment on this message     

adshenoy, mangloorTuesday, March 30, 2010
Mr. Shridhar, Oman. The very fact that God has given sexual organs and bodily plesures to enable species to be attracted to each other and as a consequence reproduce.
Comment on this message     

sunilss, IndiaSunday, March 28, 2010

It's entertaining to read people with very diversified views commenting on the subject. It is also interesting to see how some have made a clear distinction between the law of the land and morality. The courts, as far as my limited knowledge goes, have not asked anyone to have sexual relationships outside of marriage.

I just said that there is no law against it. Our personal morality and our religious beliefs, among other things would dictate if we want to have a relationship outside of marriage. Freedom and responsibility go hand in had. Didn't the courts also pronounce that a long live-in relationship is akin to marriage ?

Comment on this message     

donald, TorontoSunday, March 28, 2010
One last institute of marriage is prevailing from centuries now western society has began to pollute the sacred Indian culture and has begun to destroy our sacred country at targeting the very basic moral issue,Finally married people will become a minority and these issues will dominate our society
Comment on this message     

Sandeep Noronha, Karkala / Doha QatarSunday, March 28, 2010
"It seems that the Authour does not have the clear knowledge or cannot differentiate between the two words Pre-marital sex and Extra-marital sex. The Supreme court has legalized Pre-marital sex and live in relationship but nowhere it talks about anything related to the Extra marital sex. I think before putting up the write up the Authour should have a complete reality check on the topic"...

Comment on this message     

Shridhar, OmanSaturday, March 27, 2010
Dear Mr.shahnawaz kukkikatte, dubai/udupi

Don't you think religious sanction for men to have multiple wives will destroy the society..
Comment on this message     

Shridhar, OmanSaturday, March 27, 2010
Dear Mr. Adshenoy, Mangalore Who told you that sexuality is only for reproduction.. If it is true nature would not have put so much pleasure in it. Still if you believe so then have 2-3 children & forget about sex...
Comment on this message     

Agnello, MangaloreSaturday, March 27, 2010
Its more moral to love and live in than be cruel(to each other) and stay married.
Comment on this message     

SK. yermal, Yermal/dubaiFriday, March 26, 2010
Good articlle. The aim of article is to improve our knowledge, not to follow this or not to fight against this. Doing any type of sex thts up to individuals own risk. second thing some of friends asked difference between animals and us. difference is parenting and education. Give proper education to your children and polish it by parenting. be friendly with your kids and yourself teach them about friendship , relations, marriage , sex, pregnency etc when they turn to teenage. If proper knowlredge is there everything is go simple.

think guyz before go for marriage relatioship, just prepare yourself for parenting too. For that you need knowledge and education, thats only this article given you.
Comment on this message     

CA Sanjay D. Shah, AhmedabadFriday, March 26, 2010
Why should we become watch dog for other's behaviour or writings. If we are prudish, be so, but why enforce our standard of morality on our neighbours? Kudos to Supreme Court Judges who made those remarks11 udgement is yet to be delivered
Comment on this message     

PETER/INDIAN, MANGALORE/DUBAIThursday, March 25, 2010
Please ladies & gentelmen do not argue if you are not gone through this DO NOT MIX RELATIONSHIP WITH SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP AND HAVING SEX WITHOUT RELATIONSHIP. YOU CAN HAVE SEX WITHOUT HAVING A RELATIONSHIP i.e PAID FOR THE SERVICE AND CAN KEEP RELATIONSHIP WITHOUT THINKING ABOUT IT AND LIVE TOGETHER (well at least this law will protect some innocent people from police)
Comment on this message     

Dinesh, Mangalore/USAThursday, March 25, 2010
The job of the Supreme Court is to enforce the law - not morals. Our morals change with time. 200 years ago, it would have been immoral (also against religion) for to marry if the couple belonged to different religions or castes, but not immoral if a 70-year old man married (or even raped) a 10-year old girl. Our own Mahatma Gandhi married (and had sex) before either he or his wife was 18. Were they immoral?

All the Supreme Court is saying is that the Indian Penal Code does not prohibit two consenting adults in living together or having sex.

Prostitution is selling (for payment) one's body for money, most of the time unwillingly. That is a different story altogether.

Animals have sex knowing fully well who is responsible for the babies born. Generally the female animal has a choice of having sex or not with the male. Unfortunately, and very sadly, not so with most women.

There is a problem if and when children are born. Which is why there should be a law making the father of a child responsible - married to the mother or not.

The Supreme Court is NOT saying that all future adult couples should live and have sex before marriage. If they don't want or want, it is their own business, not the business of the (moral or regular) police, neighbors and journalists.

You really think pre-marital sex was invented after 2005 by immoral people?
Comment on this message     

Derek, BostonThursday, March 25, 2010
To the guys like Shenoy & shahnawas... Welcome to the real world!!! You may think you have seen the world YOU live in , but you have not seen the world WE live in. Your world you see is what you see within. So take a look around all the corners of the world instead of commenting from distant Dubai.. to which is your world only!

I come from a place where marriage is recognised between two persons and not between two different sexes. If I can live with in such a world.. why not you! It is not our lives ! we go along our lives as they go about theirs without any conflict.

Morever,It is not always about you and me, it is about us ALL. So please grow up in this world and Live in it with Happiness & Enjoy it ! YOU ONLY GET ONE LIFE!
Comment on this message     

Derek, BostonThursday, March 25, 2010
To the guys like Shenoy & shahnawas... Welcome to the real world!!! You may think you have seen the world YOU live in , but you have not seen the world WE live in. Your world you see is what you see within. So take a look around all the corners of the world instead of commenting from distant Dubai.. to which is your world only!

I come from a place where marriage is recognised between two persons and not between two different sexes. If I can live with in such a world.. why not you! It is not our lives ! we go along our lives as they go about theirs without any conflict.

Morever,It is not always about you and me, it is about us ALL. So please grow up in this world and Live in it with Happiness & Enjoy it ! YOU ONLY GET ONE LIFE!
Comment on this message     

Nathalia Pinto, USAThursday, March 25, 2010
Yes, I agree with Dr Abraham. Very useful and interesting article. Without such article we cannot bring social awreness. Our community always lags behind, because we hide sex education from our young children. First of all a good sex education (Impacts and guidance) is very important.
Comment on this message     

Dr Abraham C K, KuwaitThursday, March 25, 2010
Very well written article, infact such articles are required to bring social awareness. Today's media should focus on such issues. Hats off to daijiworld. thanks for giving space to such imp issues. This is the reason, you stand much above compared to other community related websites. I wish author every success.
Comment on this message     

adshenoy, mangloorThursday, March 25, 2010
Is there a difference between animals and humans? Does not look like per law courts.
Sexuality is for reproduction.
Have courts forgotten it?
Comment on this message     

MVS, MangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
India is encouraging western culture by this move made by Supreme Court.There is no sanctity of matrimony left.
While there is no support for single parents by the Govt., this is another move towards creating dysfunctional families. Also, I think, now the Govt. must make mandatory pre-marital AIDS screening to protect the ones that want to get into holy matrimony or make the expenses towards I-Pill tax-deductible.
Comment on this message     

jeannie , houston /texas Thursday, March 25, 2010
hai, what do u all want in life , a true love , a love which beyond any exspectation , a love knows only to give , which dosen't ask anything in retern, any money or wealth , or any kind obligation , Such love u can live in little with full of happiness , any where in the world , any city or country , able to live a peacefull , happey life, if u get this type of love go for it without any barrier, but ..... do u ever .... / in this Kalliyug ?
Comment on this message     

shahnawaz kukkikatte, dubai/udupiThursday, March 25, 2010

First of all, its alien to Indians and its totally foreign. Live in relations and premarital sex has no sanction in any of major religions and it amounts only to sin and not an offence as observed by the SC. I am sorry to observe that SC has blindly igonred religious aspects of such relations and without the tenets of religious teachings no nation, no civilization has flourished. Such allowance shall only give negative results and the society is heading towards destruction. SC has encouraged concubine culture (though it doesnt amount to prostitution) and the sanctity of marriage shall go down.

One has to draw a line between sin and offence. Sin has religious/ethical implications and offence has only legal implications. What about the kids born out of this relation? Would the society recognise them? Before endorsing live in relation and premarital sex. SC should adequately safeguard and gurantee the rights of children born from this relations.

These children must be given legal rights or else these children are called as "bastards". The change is not that easy as thought by SC. Long way to go and I dont endorse what SC has said. The judges are not devine and they are too human. I ask these judges to reserve judgement and pass the judgement only after reading major religious scriptures like Bible, Geetha, Quran and Vedas. These judges are lacking spiritual knowledge and they may be masters in material knowledge but paupers in spirituality. I call upon SRS/BD to protest this now

Comment on this message     

Larry, MangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
To all those who are opposed to a live in relationship i ask this: why are you just looking at the physical relationship involved?
The people choosing to live together are adults and have their own rights to do so as long as it is within moral and legal boundaries. Besides, in India, there are way too many families shattered by divorce or messy marriages. I think it would be better if people lived together, understood each other and made decisions responsibly rather than have a divorce and ruin their children's lives too. In a live-in relationship there's always the option of walking out less painfully if things don't work out than in marriage. Ultimately it comes down to the strength of their love for each other. Marriage is a symbol of the love two souls have for each other and should not be treated as the only way of expressing love.
I'm sure by now people have realized that all marriages weren't made in heaven. So cheers to the judges and those Indians who aren't afraid of keeping an open mind.
Comment on this message     

Ronald, MangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
There are advantages and disadvantages in both marriage and live in relationships. If a couple in live in relationship had a child then later if couple gets separated (e.g: man runs away) then the woman has to strugle. I don't think goverment has planned to provide support to such incidents. In Western countries there is full support from the goverment for single mum. Goverment will take care of all the expenses. Is this possible in India?. Also for christians as per bible the pre marital sex is considered sin.
Comment on this message     

alwyn, kulshekarThursday, March 25, 2010
pub culture is western valentines day is western, now which culture is this where is muthalik now no guts to retaliate to this or i have a doubt he too lives in this type of relationship
Comment on this message     

Jess, MangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
NOW WHERE IS MUTALIK? WHERE IS THE RAMA SENE? Let them go and speak to the judges. Valentine day is not our culture, now this live in relationship is our culture? Really may God save our nation.
Comment on this message     

Pearl D'Silva, Mangalore/BangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
Good that the Indian legislature has made it legal! Else I have known cases where families interfere in and cause a break up between pairs who have been in a live in relation.What is the girl left with then?
This law wouldn't have been passed for any trivial incidents.
Great going India!
Comment on this message     

karen, mThursday, March 25, 2010
If I am not mistaken, the SC ruling concerns live-in relationships and PRE-marital sex, and has not commented on the implications of EXTRA-marital sex. The title of your article implies the SC condoning extra-marital sex.
Comment on this message     

Lydia Lobo, KadriThursday, March 25, 2010
Jude D'Souza, Bangalore,

The issue can be equaled to street dogs' practice only when two adults living together outside the covenant of marriage fight for custody/allowance for children resulting with such relationship. Educated people having chosen to live together do take appropriate measures not to allow matters develop to such extent.

Here, no such discussion came up. The court plainly allows two consenting adults to live together. Whether you and me agree or not, this is what is happening today we can take it as a clue in monitoring our own children's career.
Comment on this message     

A. Fernandes, MumbaiThursday, March 25, 2010
And whose morality do we follow in a country like India?
The author would find the practice of having multiple wives immoral. But that would be morally acceptable to his Muslim neighbour. It is not the job of the state to dictate what is moral and what isn't.
Religions and individuals are free to have their opinions of what is moral and enforce that among their followers. But they cross the line when they try to impose their version of morality on others.

Perhaps the author should read the judgement in the 377 case where the delhi high court has addressed this topic. It states that the morality of the majority cannot outweigh the constitutional rights of a minority.

Besides what has the supreme court said that is new?
It has only reiterated the law as it stands. There is no law against pre marital sex (as opposed to adultery) or living together. If one feels so strongly about it, lobby your MP to pass a law against it. Until then stop blaming the courts for enforcing the law of the land.
Comment on this message     

Abraham Coutinho, Mundkur/BombayThursday, March 25, 2010

The judgment is OK and fine. We should not mix up the religion we profess with the Law. The question before the Supreme Court Judges was not to decide the Khusboo case as per religion. But as per Law. The Quesstion before them was whether Khusboo has committed any offence under the Indian Penal Code? If yes, under which section? There was no answer for that. Means no offence and hence no punishment. Rest of the matter is decided on legal and common footing.

She was above 18 years of age.Not minor. But Major. It is her Free Will (consider the Fundamental Rights granted in the Costitution of India). From constitution, all the laws followed including this Indian Penal Code. She had lived with a or many men. But not taken any money for that matter. Nor she is paid for that. There was sex between them without money transaction for a single or all the acts. Hence it not Prostituion. So, not punishable. There ends the Judge's authority to punish her. Just to say other instances, the Judge might have observed the case of Radha and Krisha living together without marriage. That is all. It was about morality in question then and now.

I or you , as a Christian or Hindu whether we like or not should not touch the judgement. Because it a matter of the Law.

Religiously, we do not like Khusboo's act. So, let us not support or follow her. Just because she has escaped from the clutches of Law,she and her acts are not above morlity.

Comment on this message     

Lydia Lobo, KadriThursday, March 25, 2010
It won't be wrong if we say 'every application has side effects' because, live-in relationships is the result of an ambitious career/busy corporate life. Man and woman are equally responsible for this development.

Well, parents' initial strive is to allow their children to study as much as they want. But this process gradually s out the youth from routine path of study-job-marriage-family. They proceed on two parallel ladders : Education and Job (career). They have less time to devote for marriage or family. Their sexual need gets fulfilled by a member of opposite gender, similarly ambitious.

How is the nation going benefit from this and at what cost ? Well, unnoticeable decrease in population and strengthening economy but strangulation of our values, culture and principles.

Its like we strangulate our values and cultural for want of money but money cannot purchase these very qualities once its too late.
Comment on this message     

Anand Dsilva, DubaiThursday, March 25, 2010
I know many people involved in live in relationships here in Dubai and some in India too. I do not endorse it at all. But I understand the Supreme Court's verdict.

Last year homosexuality was decriminalised by the Supreme Court and it was misunderstood by many as homosexuality has been legalised. Not really. What it meant was people with homosexual tendencies cannot be criminalised by the society.

I am not a legal expert, but what yesterday's verdict meant to say was when 2 consenting individuals who are adults are living together out of their own choice and not causing any harm to anybody it is not an offence from the legal point of view.

The verdict should not be misconstrued as sex outside marriage has been legalised. People indulging in extra or pre marital affairs lay a foundation to ruin their lives. Same time law cannot take course with 2 consenting individuals. Prosititution should not be understood here as live in, as it is flesh trade for money.
Comment on this message     

Jude Dsouza, BangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
I suggest all to observe Dogs on the streets that should answer all questions on Live in and Marriage relationships.It is not the correct time for this LAW in India we need to develop more mentally for another 100 years then the law will be suitable for us probably.
At this stage with this kind of laws we will become a nation of stray dogs.
Comment on this message     

Patrick R Braggs, Bejai, MangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
As per the law commission,the Judiciary is overburdened with thousands of important cases pending due to shortage of learned judges.But still they find time to allow such matters to be heard and even pass judgements.It seems the judiciary has also followed the executive and bureacracy in dealing with matters which are least important in nation building. wonder what our forefathers who drafted our constitution with immense thought and deliberations must be wondering....GOD save our nation
Comment on this message     

John Correa, MangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
Live in relationship is a Hi-Tech Adultry!!! The union of a man and a woman is considered as one of the most sacred act. But incited by anything from movies to daily TV Serials, the younger generation, has started leading a very liberal lifestyle. In a bid to know their partners better, they denounce the age-old ethics and get down to some serious living together agreements. One needs to really dig into the pros and cons of living together to know what he or she is getting into.
Comment on this message     

Manish, MumbaiThursday, March 25, 2010
Respected sir,
I just read the news about Khushboo and Indian judges back unmarried lovers.
I am very much amazed to read one line in the news “Hindu gods Lord Krishna and Radha were co-habiting lovers”, this statement has totally banished the terms of Vedas and scriptures… without understanding the scriptural point of view , how can someone quote like this.

And the relationship between the Radha and krishna was not like any mundane , roadside lover… it is the relationsip of highest service, that nobody can understand without the proper guru’s guidance..
I am understuck by just reading that , that even judges of highest order are now questioning the co existence of radha and krishna ..

Please reply back…
I know my small mail does not matter to you much … still I felt so ashamed that comparison is made between a roadside actress to the supreme god.
If judges of higher court cannot take responsibility of saving the sanctity of vedic culture and making such public comments which destroys people faith .. I don’t know what we can do.
Comment on this message     

Roshan Bragnza, Eden garden Thursday, March 25, 2010
Dear Francis...Sex need not only for creation and also sex outside marriage is not a big phenomenon now a dayz. It existed since human race started on this earth , why should we have problem with that .
Live in relationship stand only on love and respect but marriage is just a custom . Be practical ..how many unhappy marriages we have today in our society (specialy catholic christians?? ). Any serious relationship does'nt need a certificate of marriage as it stand on love . Keeping aside religious sentiments one has to back this liberal approach of supreme court.

Bottom line is its just ok to have a live in relationship with a good intent . And also it provides easy escape rout if it fails or if somebody strays.
Comment on this message     

manish, mumbaiThursday, March 25, 2010
Respected sir,
I just read the news about Khushboo and Indian judges back unmarried lovers.
I am very much amazed to read one line in the news “Hindu gods Lord Krishna and Radha were co-habiting lovers”, this statement has totally banished the terms of Vedas and scriptures… without understanding the scriptural point of view , how can someone quote like this.

And the relationship between the Radha and krishna was not like any mundane , roadside lover… it is the relationsip of highest service, that nobody can understand without the proper guru’s guidance..
I am understuck by just reading that , that even judges of highest order are now questioning the co existence of radha and krishna ..

Please reply back…
I know my small mail does not matter to you much … still I felt so ashamed that comparison is made between a roadside actress to the supreme god.
If judges of higher court cannot take responsibility of saving the sanctity of vedic culture and making such public comments which destroys people faith .. I don’t know what we can do.
Comment on this message     

donnie, mangaloreThursday, March 25, 2010
i think this is a right decision. and mr. francis i think you dont respect personal freedom. its a choice. no one is forcing you have pre-marital or live in relationship. its not a prostitution. i cant understand how you came up with that idea.
Comment on this message     

Roashan Braganza , Garden of EdenThursday, March 25, 2010
Dear Francis...Sex need not only for creation and also sex outside marriage is not a bid a phenomenon. It existed since human race started on this earth , why should we have problem with that .
Live in relationship stand only on love and respect but marriage is just a custom . Be practical ..how many unhappy marriages we have today in our society (specialy catholic chritisns?? ). Any serious relationshio does'nt need a certificate of marriage it stand on love . Keeping aside religious sentiments one has to back this liberal approach of supreme court.

And premarital sex is concerned itz becoming joke now a dayz. Everybody has it behind bars especially christian girls , so it hardly bothers anybody . Mantra for thus girls is such that have premarital sex with 'non christian' (specialy muslim boys ) and get married to a catholic sober boy (hmmm and well setlled) . This is a complete different topic indeed.

Bottom line is its just ok to have a live in relationship with a good intent . And also it provides easy escape rout if it fails or if somebody strays.
Comment on this message     

Najam Batrekere, BajpeThursday, March 25, 2010
Francis- IXE/DXB - you are right!
Seems Judges are 'Rengeela' Typed.

I can add further in Hindi:

Halke ki Hawaldari main Gaaon ka Satya-naash !

Comment on this message     

Francis, Mangalore/DubaiThursday, March 25, 2010
Live in relations are nothing but prostitution. If govt wants to legalize live in relationship they should at least make it compulsory to get it registered at a judicial authority.(as a christian I don't support the idea of live in relationship, but when a law is passed we have no other go other than to defend against the maximum damage.).Whenever it is not registered it should be considered as prostitution and dealt with severely.
First of all we have to send the compulsorily all judges for mental check up. Now a days judgements are given without assessing the effects of their judgement.If I argue in front of them " God put love and sex into every human being so there is nothing wrong in exercising it as and when you like it", may be they will think it is right.
Comment on this message     

Print this Article
Email this article to your friend
 
Write your Comments
 
Article Title Exclusive : Legal Floodgates Opened For Extra-marital Sex !
Your Name
Native Place / Place of Residence
Your E-mail
Your Comment
[Please limit your comments within 1500 characters]

You have characters left.
Disclaimer: Please write your correct name and email address. Kindly do not post any personal abuse, defamatory, infringing, obscene, indecent, discriminatory or unlawful or similar text. Daijiworld.com reserves the right to edit / block / delete without notice any content received from readers.
 
Security Validation
Enter the characters in the image above
 
 
Published by Daijiworld Media Pvt Ltd Mangalore
Editor-in-chief : Walter Nandalike


Corporate Office :
Daijiworld Residency,
Airport Road, Bondel Post,
Mangalore - 575 008
Karnataka India
Telephone : +91-824-2982023
City Office :
First Floor,
Divya Deepa Arcade,
Bendorewell, Kankanady,
Mangalore - 575 002
Karnataka India
Telephone : +91-824-4259372
e-mail   General enquiry: office@daijiworld.com, News & Info : news@daijiworld.com

Disclaimer | Privacy Policy | About Us
Copyright ©2001 - 2017. All rights reserved.
Our Franchise Offices
Kishoo Enterprises,
3rd Floor, Mandavi Trade Centre,
Kadiyali, Udupi – 576 102
Telephone : 0091-820-4295571
e-mail : udupi@daijiworld.com
Daijiworld Middle East FZE
P.O.Box: 84772, Dubai, UAE
Tel: 971-50-6597629  Fax: 971-4-2639207
Email: dubai@daijiworld.com
There has been a database error. Technical Support has already been notified. You will be informed when this issue is resolved. Thank you for your patience!