Personal Protection Case

860 Words4 Pages
4.) Violation of the personal safety protective order:
First and foremost, it must have a clear recognition that the personal safety protective order will not be ineffective and enforceable for the respondent refuses to accept. If the respondent refuses to accept the habeas corpus, the indemnity may be taken. Sichuan's first personal protection order is made in this case, the respondent refused to accept the habeas corpus and did not answer the phone. Finally, the court placed the habeas corpus on the door and stated in the court's "service receipt" that it had been delivered to the respondent's home and the respondent refused to open the door. Refused to answer the phone. So take a post to serve and take pictures to prove. "If the refusal
…show more content…
According to article 34 of the Domestic Violence Act, the respondent violates the person If the person does not constitute a crime, the people 's court shall give the admonition that it may be punished with a fine of not more than 1,000 yuan in accordance with the seriousness of the case and detained for less than 15 days, that is, the personal safety protection order After the issue, the perpetrators continue to violence, to achieve more than a minor injury will be held criminally responsible for the general level of violence and violence is also repeated minor injuries, this time, in violation of the habeas corpus, it can only be fine in accordance with the circumstances or detention This means that the Anti-Domestic Violence Law violates the habeas corpus If you are a low-income poor family, a fine can not afford for them, and it will lead to disregard. If you are a poor family, a fine of less than 1,000 yuan, and the burden on the applicant is too heavy Fines continue to repeatedly violate the habeas corpus, and even the respondent, the court ruled a fine in violation of the habeas corpus, but the respondent was fined for more than half a year.On the contrary, the Taiwanese Domestic Violence Act applied for domestic violence against the respondent Such as harassment, contact, tracking, communication, communication or other non-essential contact, without a residence, etc., shall be sentenced to not more than three years…show more content…
Based on the threat to the life of the applicant and his family, the court ruled that the security penalty. However, later the applicant to apologize has been apologized and get understanding as a reason to request the court to cancel the punishment. The reason why the victim applied for the revocation of the punishment may be because the respondent's threat to her, making the victim know that it will face retaliation. There may be the applicant's weak apology and soft heart is no longer investigated. But in any case, are likely to be the applicant to escape the legal sanctions means. Therefore, the punishment based on the authority of the law and the violation of the habeas corpus should not be waived. Therefore, the violation of the relevant provisions of the protection order, Anti-Domestic Violence Law should be further

More about Personal Protection Case

Open Document