Recent Posts
XacXSA
No.106795
>>106793(OP)
I wish paxtan had nuked us
4sBnj1
No.106796
>>106793(OP)
Also, the wife:s affair partner was her brother in law.
XacXSA
No.106797
>>106796
Bhabhi fetish is probably even higher than cheese fetish in india
tmrgEV
No.106801
>>106793(OP)
I just hope the man goes ER against the wife, child, the brther in law and le faggot judge who passed this judgement so it can serve as a lesson to future judges & cheaters.
cmsXXr
No.106804
>>106795
Accha randi ki aulad
N8K7+4
No.106811
ITagtV
No.106814
>>106793(OP)
Abe ye to saalon se hai. Section 112 evidence act. Bhosdiwalon pe BSA mein apni galti sudharne ka mauka bhi thha. Par nahin. Wahi exact section rewrite kardia aur ab section 116 bana dia BSA mein. Madarchod legislature. Ismein court ki koi galti nahi. Jo kitab mein likha hai, court uske hisaab se hi chalta hai. Aur kitab likhi hai madarchod netaon ne.
f8l8Un
No.106815
>>106793(OP)
LMFAOOO, imagine being the poor guy. Just kill the judges and then rope yourself at this point. Bruh this death sentence by rope or life sentence can not be worse than this life lmao.
!lmOJk15ILR6OW/a
8fMLBC
No.106825
>>106793(OP)
This is what you get for not burning the house down
GbOcQS
No.106868
EJSP0h
No.106869
>>106793(OP)
Do Indian laws care abt any gender?
gUPgPv
No.106905
>>106793(OP)
and that's why i wanted a war
gUPgPv
No.106925
>>106793(OP)
koi is jujsaab ki wife ko pata ke uski chut mar do bina condom ke fir dekhte hein
gUPgPv
No.106931
>>106869
good randi should be subordinate to man
ITagtV
No.106960
ITagtV
No.106962
Heendu bhi na yaar....
Paglu.
gUPgPv
No.106964
>>106960
the constitution doesn't mention waqf either but the SC declared it unconstitutional toh fir ye kyu nhi suna sakta k2a?
gUPgPv
No.106965
>>106960
vaise faisla badalne ki toh mene baat bhi nhi kri bas bol rha hu uski patni chod do koi fir dekhte hein kya sunata hai chomu
ITagtV
No.106988
>>106964
SC hasn't declared waqf amendment unconstitutional yet. It is still pending before the court but it will not declare it unconstitutional. Mullas will lose the case.
Baaki ye procedural law 1872 se chala aa raha hai. Agar badlna hota to chodiji BSA mein bhi badal sakte thhe. Par unhone kya kia? Section 112 IEA ko copypaste kardia section 116 BSA mein aur keh dia humne angrezon ke kaale kanoon mita diye hain. Aur saari public khush ho gayi. Jab DNA testing itni advanced ho gayi hai to ab bhi ye purane kanoon ka kyun use kia legislature ne? Judiciary to bas wahi kar sakti hai to books mein likha hai. Kuch chuninda cases mein jahan koi ambiguity ho, wahan judiciary apna bheja lagake kanoon ko alag dhang se interpret krti hai. Section 116 BSA bohot clear hai. Koi ambiguity nahin hai. Sab bhadve legislature ki galti hai.
gUPgPv
No.107001
>>106988
>jab DNA testing itni advanced ho gayi hai to ab bhi ye purane kanoon ka kyun use kia legislature ne
CIA funded feminist NGOs protest kar karke india ki reputation or bjp ka vote share duba denge
GbOcQS
No.107005
>>107001
Parents can consent to take blood from their babies for blood test but they cannot when its about dna. Kya chodu laws hai. Bachha mar thodi jayega 2 boond khoon se. Blaady
gUPgPv
No.107013
>>107005
i remember someone saying it's to prevent the bastardification of the child, which is so retarded man, they destroyed another man's life over a kid who is not even his
gUPgPv
No.107014
>>107005
the judiciary has been infiltrated by femin!gger CIA moles
tQuoB7
No.107017
>>106797
What the fuck is a cheese fetish
