Showing posts with label 498a. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 498a. Show all posts
Tuesday, 11 March 2014
Thursday, 12 September 2013
Court acquits two in dowry death case as complainant-cum-witness turns hostile
A local court on Tuesday acquitted two persons charged with abetment to suicide, as the complainant-cum-witness turned hostile.
Pawan, accused in the case was married to Sunita, who died after jumping from the third floor of her house in Sector 15-C on March 25 this year. Pawan allegedly harassed his wife for dowry. Sunita's brother Rajesh, who is the complainant in the case, had alleged that Pawan and his father Nand Kishore harassed his sister for money, following which a case was registered under Section 306 (abetment to suicide) of Indian Penal Code against them.
According to the complainant, he got a call on March 25 around 4 pm from the accused and was informed that his sister has been injured and has been taken to PGI. Around 7 pm on the same day his brother got a call that Sunita has jumped from the third floor of her house.
Rajesh, in his initial complaint, had alleged that Pawan and Nand Kishore demanded cash and motorbike. He had also told the police that they spent around Rs 12 to 15 lakh in the marriage which took place in 2000.
According to Rajesh, Sunita, a mother of two children, was not given proper food and was not allowed to meet her children. She was also sent to her parents ancestral home after marriage for some time. He said a local panchayat at her parents home tried to resolve the issue on several occasions.
However, Rajesh later turned hostile and refused to accept that he made any statement before the police regarding the amount of money being spent on the marriage. He also denied that he made any statement about any panchayat being held to resolve the dispute.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/court-acquits-two-in-dowry-death-case-as-complainantcumwitness-turns-hostile/1167505/
Pawan, accused in the case was married to Sunita, who died after jumping from the third floor of her house in Sector 15-C on March 25 this year. Pawan allegedly harassed his wife for dowry. Sunita's brother Rajesh, who is the complainant in the case, had alleged that Pawan and his father Nand Kishore harassed his sister for money, following which a case was registered under Section 306 (abetment to suicide) of Indian Penal Code against them.
According to the complainant, he got a call on March 25 around 4 pm from the accused and was informed that his sister has been injured and has been taken to PGI. Around 7 pm on the same day his brother got a call that Sunita has jumped from the third floor of her house.
Rajesh, in his initial complaint, had alleged that Pawan and Nand Kishore demanded cash and motorbike. He had also told the police that they spent around Rs 12 to 15 lakh in the marriage which took place in 2000.
According to Rajesh, Sunita, a mother of two children, was not given proper food and was not allowed to meet her children. She was also sent to her parents ancestral home after marriage for some time. He said a local panchayat at her parents home tried to resolve the issue on several occasions.
However, Rajesh later turned hostile and refused to accept that he made any statement before the police regarding the amount of money being spent on the marriage. He also denied that he made any statement about any panchayat being held to resolve the dispute.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/court-acquits-two-in-dowry-death-case-as-complainantcumwitness-turns-hostile/1167505/
‘Step to protect men from wives’ fake complaints not enough’
Centre's directive to states say no arrests be made without proper investigation
Taking cognisance of the increasing number of false complaints being filed under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Central Government recently issued directives to the state governments not to make any immediate arrests but conduct thorough investigations before taking any action. However, family court lawyers and activists feel that unless women are punished for lodging false complaints, this directive would not help.
"Though the directive is welcome, unless the women are punished by law for filing false cases under Section 498A, its misuse cannot be stopped," said Mahesh Kalge, a representative of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), who runs a helpline for men in distress caused by domestic disputes.
Mahesh (name changed), an IT professional from Chinchwad, had to spent a week in the lock-up after his wife filed a harassment complaint with the police.
"In most cases, the investigating officer immediately arrests the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as per the statement given by the wife. However, when the allegations prove false, the investigating officer is never held at fault. It is time the judiciary take this into account," said Mahesh.
"This directive, if implemented strictly, will surely put a tab on the misuse of this section. Of the total cases filed under this section in one year, 85 per cent turn out to be bogus," said advocate Shailaja Kelkar, matrimonial counselor who practiced in the family court for 20 years. There should be a provision in the law where husbands can sue their wives for making false allegations. Women take to filing such false complaints with an eye on compensation or husband's property, Kelkar observed.
In a letter to state chief secretaries, the Ministry of Home Affairs has asked the state governments to issue directives to the police not to arrest the husband and his relatives without checking the genuineness of the anti-dowry complaint.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-step-to-protect-men-from-wives--fake-complaints-not-enough-/542632/
Taking cognisance of the increasing number of false complaints being filed under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Central Government recently issued directives to the state governments not to make any immediate arrests but conduct thorough investigations before taking any action. However, family court lawyers and activists feel that unless women are punished for lodging false complaints, this directive would not help.
"Though the directive is welcome, unless the women are punished by law for filing false cases under Section 498A, its misuse cannot be stopped," said Mahesh Kalge, a representative of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), who runs a helpline for men in distress caused by domestic disputes.
Mahesh (name changed), an IT professional from Chinchwad, had to spent a week in the lock-up after his wife filed a harassment complaint with the police.
"In most cases, the investigating officer immediately arrests the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as per the statement given by the wife. However, when the allegations prove false, the investigating officer is never held at fault. It is time the judiciary take this into account," said Mahesh.
"This directive, if implemented strictly, will surely put a tab on the misuse of this section. Of the total cases filed under this section in one year, 85 per cent turn out to be bogus," said advocate Shailaja Kelkar, matrimonial counselor who practiced in the family court for 20 years. There should be a provision in the law where husbands can sue their wives for making false allegations. Women take to filing such false complaints with an eye on compensation or husband's property, Kelkar observed.
In a letter to state chief secretaries, the Ministry of Home Affairs has asked the state governments to issue directives to the police not to arrest the husband and his relatives without checking the genuineness of the anti-dowry complaint.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-step-to-protect-men-from-wives--fake-complaints-not-enough-/542632/
Centre's directive to states say no arrests be made without proper investigation
Taking cognisance of the increasing number of false complaints being filed under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Central Government recently issued directives to the state governments not to make any immediate arrests but conduct thorough investigations before taking any action. However, family court lawyers and activists feel that unless women are punished for lodging false complaints, this directive would not help.
"Though the directive is welcome, unless the women are punished by law for filing false cases under Section 498A, its misuse cannot be stopped," said Mahesh Kalge, a representative of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), who runs a helpline for men in distress caused by domestic disputes.
Mahesh (name changed), an IT professional from Chinchwad, had to spent a week in the lock-up after his wife filed a harassment complaint with the police.
"In most cases, the investigating officer immediately arrests the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as per the statement given by the wife. However, when the allegations prove false, the investigating officer is never held at fault. It is time the judiciary take this into account," said Mahesh.
"This directive, if implemented strictly, will surely put a tab on the misuse of this section. Of the total cases filed under this section in one year, 85 per cent turn out to be bogus," said advocate Shailaja Kelkar, matrimonial counselor who practiced in the family court for 20 years. There should be a provision in the law where husbands can sue their wives for making false allegations. Women take to filing such false complaints with an eye on compensation or husband's property, Kelkar observed.
In a letter to state chief secretaries, the Ministry of Home Affairs has asked the state governments to issue directives to the police not to arrest the husband and his relatives without checking the genuineness of the anti-dowry complaint.
- See more at: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-step-to-protect-men-from-wives--fake-complaints-not-enough-/542632/#sthash.P8aotY7I.dpuf
Taking cognisance of the increasing number of false complaints being filed under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Central Government recently issued directives to the state governments not to make any immediate arrests but conduct thorough investigations before taking any action. However, family court lawyers and activists feel that unless women are punished for lodging false complaints, this directive would not help.
"Though the directive is welcome, unless the women are punished by law for filing false cases under Section 498A, its misuse cannot be stopped," said Mahesh Kalge, a representative of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), who runs a helpline for men in distress caused by domestic disputes.
Mahesh (name changed), an IT professional from Chinchwad, had to spent a week in the lock-up after his wife filed a harassment complaint with the police.
"In most cases, the investigating officer immediately arrests the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as per the statement given by the wife. However, when the allegations prove false, the investigating officer is never held at fault. It is time the judiciary take this into account," said Mahesh.
"This directive, if implemented strictly, will surely put a tab on the misuse of this section. Of the total cases filed under this section in one year, 85 per cent turn out to be bogus," said advocate Shailaja Kelkar, matrimonial counselor who practiced in the family court for 20 years. There should be a provision in the law where husbands can sue their wives for making false allegations. Women take to filing such false complaints with an eye on compensation or husband's property, Kelkar observed.
In a letter to state chief secretaries, the Ministry of Home Affairs has asked the state governments to issue directives to the police not to arrest the husband and his relatives without checking the genuineness of the anti-dowry complaint.
- See more at: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-step-to-protect-men-from-wives--fake-complaints-not-enough-/542632/#sthash.P8aotY7I.dpuf
Centre's directive to states say no arrests be made without proper investigation
Taking cognisance of the increasing number of false complaints being filed under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Central Government recently issued directives to the state governments not to make any immediate arrests but conduct thorough investigations before taking any action. However, family court lawyers and activists feel that unless women are punished for lodging false complaints, this directive would not help.
"Though the directive is welcome, unless the women are punished by law for filing false cases under Section 498A, its misuse cannot be stopped," said Mahesh Kalge, a representative of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), who runs a helpline for men in distress caused by domestic disputes.
Mahesh (name changed), an IT professional from Chinchwad, had to spent a week in the lock-up after his wife filed a harassment complaint with the police.
"In most cases, the investigating officer immediately arrests the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as per the statement given by the wife. However, when the allegations prove false, the investigating officer is never held at fault. It is time the judiciary take this into account," said Mahesh.
"This directive, if implemented strictly, will surely put a tab on the misuse of this section. Of the total cases filed under this section in one year, 85 per cent turn out to be bogus," said advocate Shailaja Kelkar, matrimonial counselor who practiced in the family court for 20 years. There should be a provision in the law where husbands can sue their wives for making false allegations. Women take to filing such false complaints with an eye on compensation or husband's property, Kelkar observed.
In a letter to state chief secretaries, the Ministry of Home Affairs has asked the state governments to issue directives to the police not to arrest the husband and his relatives without checking the genuineness of the anti-dowry complaint.
- See more at: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-step-to-protect-men-from-wives--fake-complaints-not-enough-/542632/#sthash.P8aotY7I.dpuf
Taking cognisance of the increasing number of false complaints being filed under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Central Government recently issued directives to the state governments not to make any immediate arrests but conduct thorough investigations before taking any action. However, family court lawyers and activists feel that unless women are punished for lodging false complaints, this directive would not help.
"Though the directive is welcome, unless the women are punished by law for filing false cases under Section 498A, its misuse cannot be stopped," said Mahesh Kalge, a representative of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), who runs a helpline for men in distress caused by domestic disputes.
Mahesh (name changed), an IT professional from Chinchwad, had to spent a week in the lock-up after his wife filed a harassment complaint with the police.
"In most cases, the investigating officer immediately arrests the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law, as per the statement given by the wife. However, when the allegations prove false, the investigating officer is never held at fault. It is time the judiciary take this into account," said Mahesh.
"This directive, if implemented strictly, will surely put a tab on the misuse of this section. Of the total cases filed under this section in one year, 85 per cent turn out to be bogus," said advocate Shailaja Kelkar, matrimonial counselor who practiced in the family court for 20 years. There should be a provision in the law where husbands can sue their wives for making false allegations. Women take to filing such false complaints with an eye on compensation or husband's property, Kelkar observed.
In a letter to state chief secretaries, the Ministry of Home Affairs has asked the state governments to issue directives to the police not to arrest the husband and his relatives without checking the genuineness of the anti-dowry complaint.
- See more at: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/-step-to-protect-men-from-wives--fake-complaints-not-enough-/542632/#sthash.P8aotY7I.dpuf
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
PIL questions immediate arrests in dowry harassment cases
JAIPUR: A division bench of the high court has asked state government
to give its reply to a PIL filed by one Vinod Singhal who questioned
immediate arrests in cases pertaining to Section 498A (dowry harassment)
and Section 406 of IPC (criminal breach of trust) filed by aggrieved
wives against husband and his relatives.
The petition alleges that 70% matrimonial disputes are being converted into criminal cases by misuse of the provisions of Sections 498A and 406 of IPC. It has been alleged that once such a false criminal case is filed against the husband and his relatives the police immediately arrest the accused resulting in vanishing of chances of reconciliation between the warring husband and wife.
The PIL raises a point that since the offences are non-bailable, some guidelines must be issued so as to see that no husband or his relatives are arrested on false complaints. The petitioner demands that instead of registering the FIR immediately, the police must first call the parties for conciliation and in case the dispute remains unresolved, then only action should be initiated against the guilty husband and his relatives.
It has also been highlighted in the petition that in the recent past the Supreme Court too had observed that the law made for protection of women is being misused and has asked the Law Commission of India to report as to whether the law can be made bailable. The division bench of Chief Justice Amitava Roy and Justice V S Siradhana directed that a copy of the PIL be supplied to the government advocate.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-09/jaipur/40468015_1_pil-questions-dowry-harassment-cases-division-bench
The petition alleges that 70% matrimonial disputes are being converted into criminal cases by misuse of the provisions of Sections 498A and 406 of IPC. It has been alleged that once such a false criminal case is filed against the husband and his relatives the police immediately arrest the accused resulting in vanishing of chances of reconciliation between the warring husband and wife.
The PIL raises a point that since the offences are non-bailable, some guidelines must be issued so as to see that no husband or his relatives are arrested on false complaints. The petitioner demands that instead of registering the FIR immediately, the police must first call the parties for conciliation and in case the dispute remains unresolved, then only action should be initiated against the guilty husband and his relatives.
It has also been highlighted in the petition that in the recent past the Supreme Court too had observed that the law made for protection of women is being misused and has asked the Law Commission of India to report as to whether the law can be made bailable. The division bench of Chief Justice Amitava Roy and Justice V S Siradhana directed that a copy of the PIL be supplied to the government advocate.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-09/jaipur/40468015_1_pil-questions-dowry-harassment-cases-division-bench
पत्नी के रहते हुए दूसरी महिला से अफेयर क्रूरता नहीं: सुप्रीम कोर्ट
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने फैसला सुनाते हुए कहा है कि अगर कोई पति किसी अन्य महिला
के नजदीक जाता है तो उसे अपनी पत्नी पर क्रूरता का कसूरवार नहीं ठहराया
जा सकता. कोर्ट का कहना है कि ऐसा मामला तब तक क्रूरता के दायरे में नहीं
आएगा जब तक कि पति की नजदीकी अन्य महिला के साथ इतनी न हो जाए कि उसकी
पत्नी आत्महत्या करने पर मजबूर हो जाए.
जस्टिस केएस राधाकृष्णन की अध्यक्षता वाली बेंच ने कहा, 'हमारा ऐसा मानना है कि शादीशुदा रिश्ते के कायम रहने के दौरान अगर पति किसी और के नजदीक आ जाता है और वह अपनी वैवाहिक जिम्मेदारियां नहीं निभाता है तो भी यह पत्नी के साथ क्रूरता नहीं है.'
उन्होंने कहा, 'लेकिन अगर दूसरी महिला से पति की नजदीकी इस कदर हो कि पत्नी आत्महत्या करने पर मजबूर हो जाए तो आईपीसी की धारा 498-ए के तहत मामला बनता है.'
यह फैसला एक शख्स की अपील पर सुनाया गया, जिसके ऊपर धारा 498-ए के तहत अपनी पत्नी के साथ क्रूरता बरतने और धारा 306 के तहत आत्महत्या के लिए उकसाने का आरोप था.
इस जोड़े ने 1989 में शादी की थी. बाद में पति का अपनी सहयोगी के साथ अफेयर हो गया. इसके बाद तथाकथित रूप से पत्नी अलग-थलग महसूस करने लगी और मार्च 1996 में उसने आत्महत्या कर ली.
बेंच ने कहा, 'अदालत ने पाया कि तथाकथित एक्स्ट्रा-मेरिटल रिश्ता ऐसा नहीं था कि वह आरोपी शख्स की पत्नी को आत्महत्या के लिए मजबूर कर दे. इसके साथ ही आत्महत्या करने वाली महिला के पति ने कभी कोई ऐसा काम नहीं किया जो सामान्य परिस्थिति में पत्नी को आत्महत्या के लिए उकसाए.'
अदालत ने यह भी कहा कि अगर साबित हो जाए तो एक्स्ट्रा-मेरिटल अफेयर को गैरकानूनी और अनैतिक करार दिया जा सकता है. लेकिन इस मामले में यह साबित नहीं किया जा सका है कि पति ने पत्नी को आत्महत्या के लिए मजबूर किया.
http://aajtak.intoday.in/story/cheating-husbands-arent-guilty-of-cruelty-unless-it-drives-their-wives-to-suicide-supreme-court-rules-1-741494.html
जस्टिस केएस राधाकृष्णन की अध्यक्षता वाली बेंच ने कहा, 'हमारा ऐसा मानना है कि शादीशुदा रिश्ते के कायम रहने के दौरान अगर पति किसी और के नजदीक आ जाता है और वह अपनी वैवाहिक जिम्मेदारियां नहीं निभाता है तो भी यह पत्नी के साथ क्रूरता नहीं है.'
उन्होंने कहा, 'लेकिन अगर दूसरी महिला से पति की नजदीकी इस कदर हो कि पत्नी आत्महत्या करने पर मजबूर हो जाए तो आईपीसी की धारा 498-ए के तहत मामला बनता है.'
यह फैसला एक शख्स की अपील पर सुनाया गया, जिसके ऊपर धारा 498-ए के तहत अपनी पत्नी के साथ क्रूरता बरतने और धारा 306 के तहत आत्महत्या के लिए उकसाने का आरोप था.
इस जोड़े ने 1989 में शादी की थी. बाद में पति का अपनी सहयोगी के साथ अफेयर हो गया. इसके बाद तथाकथित रूप से पत्नी अलग-थलग महसूस करने लगी और मार्च 1996 में उसने आत्महत्या कर ली.
बेंच ने कहा, 'अदालत ने पाया कि तथाकथित एक्स्ट्रा-मेरिटल रिश्ता ऐसा नहीं था कि वह आरोपी शख्स की पत्नी को आत्महत्या के लिए मजबूर कर दे. इसके साथ ही आत्महत्या करने वाली महिला के पति ने कभी कोई ऐसा काम नहीं किया जो सामान्य परिस्थिति में पत्नी को आत्महत्या के लिए उकसाए.'
अदालत ने यह भी कहा कि अगर साबित हो जाए तो एक्स्ट्रा-मेरिटल अफेयर को गैरकानूनी और अनैतिक करार दिया जा सकता है. लेकिन इस मामले में यह साबित नहीं किया जा सका है कि पति ने पत्नी को आत्महत्या के लिए मजबूर किया.
http://aajtak.intoday.in/story/cheating-husbands-arent-guilty-of-cruelty-unless-it-drives-their-wives-to-suicide-supreme-court-rules-1-741494.html
Monday, 9 September 2013
PIL questions immediate arrests in dowry harassment cases
JAIPUR: A division bench of the high court has asked state government
to give its reply to a PIL filed by one Vinod Singhal who questioned
immediate arrests in cases pertaining to Section 498A (dowry harassment)
and Section 406 of IPC (criminal breach of trust) filed by aggrieved
wives against husband and his relatives.
The petition alleges that 70% matrimonial disputes are being converted into criminal cases by misuse of the provisions of Sections 498A and 406 of IPC. It has been alleged that once such a false criminal case is filed against the husband and his relatives the police immediately arrest the accused resulting in vanishing of chances of reconciliation between the warring husband and wife.
The PIL raises a point that since the offences are non-bailable, some guidelines must be issued so as to see that no husband or his relatives are arrested on false complaints. The petitioner demands that instead of registering the FIR immediately, the police must first call the parties for conciliation and in case the dispute remains unresolved, then only action should be initiated against the guilty husband and his relatives.
It has also been highlighted in the petition that in the recent past the Supreme Court too had observed that the law made for protection of women is being misused and has asked the Law Commission of India to report as to whether the law can be made bailable. The division bench of Chief Justice Amitava Roy and Justice V S Siradhana directed that a copy of the PIL be supplied to the government advocate.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-09/jaipur/40468015_1_pil-questions-dowry-harassment-cases-division-bench
The petition alleges that 70% matrimonial disputes are being converted into criminal cases by misuse of the provisions of Sections 498A and 406 of IPC. It has been alleged that once such a false criminal case is filed against the husband and his relatives the police immediately arrest the accused resulting in vanishing of chances of reconciliation between the warring husband and wife.
The PIL raises a point that since the offences are non-bailable, some guidelines must be issued so as to see that no husband or his relatives are arrested on false complaints. The petitioner demands that instead of registering the FIR immediately, the police must first call the parties for conciliation and in case the dispute remains unresolved, then only action should be initiated against the guilty husband and his relatives.
It has also been highlighted in the petition that in the recent past the Supreme Court too had observed that the law made for protection of women is being misused and has asked the Law Commission of India to report as to whether the law can be made bailable. The division bench of Chief Justice Amitava Roy and Justice V S Siradhana directed that a copy of the PIL be supplied to the government advocate.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-09/jaipur/40468015_1_pil-questions-dowry-harassment-cases-division-bench
Bail, not jail, the norm, says SC, but the reality is opposite
MUMBAI:
Bail, not jail, is a dominant principle of criminal law practised by
every mature democracy and in India often in its breach. Be it A Raja or
Kanimozhi in the 2G case, Suresh Kalmadi in the CWG case or Asaram,
facing an unproven sexual assault charge, once a case becomes high
profile courts are diffident to grant bail even if that flies against
the express directive of the Supreme Court.
The same neglect of the principle is often seen in the case of thousands of undertrial prisoners — people who fall in a category that's quite the opposite of the high-profile cases; men and women without resources, financial or political — who are left to languish in jail for want of bail orders from trial courts.
The same neglect of the principle is often seen in the case of thousands of undertrial prisoners — people who fall in a category that's quite the opposite of the high-profile cases; men and women without resources, financial or political — who are left to languish in jail for want of bail orders from trial courts.
A Mumbai lawyer says: "It's not only the underprivileged who fail to
secure justice at a pre-trial stage, even highprofile arrests — cases
that attract media hype — are often denied bail without adequate reasons
for days or months." While releasing a bunch of accused in the 2G scam
case, the SC reinforced that bail ought to be a norm, not jail.
Stiff opposition by police to bail applications even when investigations are over and the accused not likely to flee, has become the norm, lawyers said. Senior crime counsel Amit Desai said: "The court must be alive to the fact that liberty, a fundamental right, is taken away in such instances. It must ensure that the investigating officer concentrates on investigation that requires an accused to be in custody so that he can secure his liberty at the earliest.''
Police often treat denial of bail as an "easy route'', say experts. "Trials take time to begin. Often pre-trial incarceration exceeds maximum punishment for the charges invoked or becomes an incentive for police not to create a water-tight case on evidence,'' said advocate Saurabh Kirpal from Delhi. He added: "It becomes an easy route not to work hard at getting a conviction and treat pre-trial custody as substitute punishment."
There are times when despite long pre-trial jail, the case may end with an acquittal, which makes a mockery of justice. The need for an arrest is to secure presence of the accused for investigation, prevent further crimes and escape, make the community safer if the accused is prone to violence, and witness tampering. When these factors are absent, bail should be automatic.
Ashok Desai, former attorney general, said, "The object of denying bail cannot be punitive because punishment starts after conviction. Until then the accused is deemed innocent. Although bail, not jail, is the principle, there are two main factors to deny bail — possibility of the accused absconding and probability that he may interfere with the investigation and witnesses.
"A court has to balance the valuable right of liberty and the interest of society. It's here that often the prosecution suggests that if the offence is serious or the accused is an influential person, there's a danger of his absconding. This is why courts can impose conditional bail. If a condition is transgressed, the bail can be cancelled. Bail cannot be denied to teach a lesson to one whose offence is yet to be proved."
A series of commissions, from the third police commission to the law commission, stressed how police misuse arrest-powers. Ram Jethmalani, ace defence counsel, has for decades stressed that "pretrial arrest is neither meant to be punitive nor a punishment before verdict. It's meant to facilitate investigation." If an accused cooperates with the police and submits himself for investigation there's no justification for arrest, he said.
Senior Supreme Court counsel CA Sundaram said that legally, bail is a right. Advocate Harshad Ponda said liberty is guaranteed as a fundamental right. Under the right to life, liberty cannot be denied without adequate reason. Except when justified in heinous crimes such as rape, murder and dacoity.
Added Shrikant Bhat, a leading crime counsel in Mumbai: "The SC in 1994 laid down guidelines that hold good today. It proscribed police from using their power to arrest, just because it exists, without justification." Advocate Aabad Ponda said: "The amendment to the CrPC is to bring in some checks on indiscriminate and liberal arrests without any warrant by police.'' Every offence classified as non-bailable does not justify an arrest, said advocate Anand Grover.
Even in jurisdictions abroad, as in Florida, the law is firm that bail applications be decided on grounds that don't impinge on a person's liberty more than necessary to aid investigation or secure society's interest.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-09-08/india/41873447_1_denying-bail-conditional-bail-cwg-case
Stiff opposition by police to bail applications even when investigations are over and the accused not likely to flee, has become the norm, lawyers said. Senior crime counsel Amit Desai said: "The court must be alive to the fact that liberty, a fundamental right, is taken away in such instances. It must ensure that the investigating officer concentrates on investigation that requires an accused to be in custody so that he can secure his liberty at the earliest.''
Police often treat denial of bail as an "easy route'', say experts. "Trials take time to begin. Often pre-trial incarceration exceeds maximum punishment for the charges invoked or becomes an incentive for police not to create a water-tight case on evidence,'' said advocate Saurabh Kirpal from Delhi. He added: "It becomes an easy route not to work hard at getting a conviction and treat pre-trial custody as substitute punishment."
There are times when despite long pre-trial jail, the case may end with an acquittal, which makes a mockery of justice. The need for an arrest is to secure presence of the accused for investigation, prevent further crimes and escape, make the community safer if the accused is prone to violence, and witness tampering. When these factors are absent, bail should be automatic.
Ashok Desai, former attorney general, said, "The object of denying bail cannot be punitive because punishment starts after conviction. Until then the accused is deemed innocent. Although bail, not jail, is the principle, there are two main factors to deny bail — possibility of the accused absconding and probability that he may interfere with the investigation and witnesses.
"A court has to balance the valuable right of liberty and the interest of society. It's here that often the prosecution suggests that if the offence is serious or the accused is an influential person, there's a danger of his absconding. This is why courts can impose conditional bail. If a condition is transgressed, the bail can be cancelled. Bail cannot be denied to teach a lesson to one whose offence is yet to be proved."
A series of commissions, from the third police commission to the law commission, stressed how police misuse arrest-powers. Ram Jethmalani, ace defence counsel, has for decades stressed that "pretrial arrest is neither meant to be punitive nor a punishment before verdict. It's meant to facilitate investigation." If an accused cooperates with the police and submits himself for investigation there's no justification for arrest, he said.
Senior Supreme Court counsel CA Sundaram said that legally, bail is a right. Advocate Harshad Ponda said liberty is guaranteed as a fundamental right. Under the right to life, liberty cannot be denied without adequate reason. Except when justified in heinous crimes such as rape, murder and dacoity.
Added Shrikant Bhat, a leading crime counsel in Mumbai: "The SC in 1994 laid down guidelines that hold good today. It proscribed police from using their power to arrest, just because it exists, without justification." Advocate Aabad Ponda said: "The amendment to the CrPC is to bring in some checks on indiscriminate and liberal arrests without any warrant by police.'' Every offence classified as non-bailable does not justify an arrest, said advocate Anand Grover.
Even in jurisdictions abroad, as in Florida, the law is firm that bail applications be decided on grounds that don't impinge on a person's liberty more than necessary to aid investigation or secure society's interest.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-09-08/india/41873447_1_denying-bail-conditional-bail-cwg-case
Friday, 6 September 2013
Wednesday, 4 September 2013
सुहागरात में पत्नी ने मारी लात, युवक ने जिद पकड़ ली लड़की बनने की
अहमदाबाद। बीते शुक्रवार को अहमदाबाद के सिविल हॉस्पिटल में
सेक्स चेंज का ऑपरेशन कराने पहुंचा युवक कौन था? आखिर क्यों उसने लड़की
बनने की जिद ठानी? पुरुष से स्त्री बनने के लिए इसने क्या-क्या किया? यह
जानने के लिए दिव्यभास्करडॉटकॉम की टीम इस युवक से मुलाकात की।
बातचीत में पता चला कि इसके पीछे उसका दर्द था। वह विवाहित होने के
बाद भी अब तक सेक्स से वंचित है। इतना ही नहीं, अब वह पत्नी से इतना त्रस्त
हो चुका है कि उसने स्त्री बनकर रहने का दृढ़ निश्चय कर लिया है।
Monday, 2 September 2013
For equal laws
THE need for progressive reform in laws in general and in laws relating
to women in particular has been on the agenda of women’s groups and
organisations for long. In the past three decades, major amendments have
been pushed through in existing laws and new laws for women, such as
the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005, have also
emerged. At the same time, in the area of family and personal laws, it
is an acknowledged fact that none of them gives women the right to
marital property.
While women’s groups underpin their understanding of reform and change in the framework of more equality, others view reform from the narrow prism of imposing a uniform approach that apparently stems from sectarian and conservative motives. The central and overriding concern of women’s organisations such as the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) was the question of equality, said Kirti Singh, senior advocate in the Supreme Court, and this included equality within their communities. In her experience, women’s groups, including AIDWA, have had to encounter resistance from multiple levels of patriarchy across communities.
The demand for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) by certain political parties was rooted in the need for equality as seen from a certain standpoint. The approach to the UCC, said Kirti Singh, began getting defined in very difficult, unequal and political terms by parties like the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which seemed to suggest that Hindu laws were the ideal laws and that all other laws in some sense should be like Hindu laws. Both the BJP and the Congress had opportunistic views, one in support of the UCC and the other in opposition to it, with an eye on votes.
“We distanced ourselves from these groups, the BJP’s position on the UCC as well as from sections within the Muslim communities who were against any reform from within and wrongly argued that it was against the tenets of their religion. We emphasised that we wanted equality within different communities and the ending of discrimination against women within the family too,” she said.
The experience of women’s groups during the Shah Bano agitation showed that women within the Muslim community were also keen for reform of the law, which patriarchal elements within the community opposed in the name of religion. In the 1990s, several Muslim reform groups began advocating reform within Muslim Personal Law, and Kirti Singh said women’s groups, including AIDWA, pushed for a two-pronged strategy to bring about common, equal laws in areas such as matrimonial property and registration of marriages. It became apparent that the sections opposing reform within religions also articulated from time to time a narrow and biased interpretation of religion as well.
http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/for-equal-laws/article5037793.ece
While women’s groups underpin their understanding of reform and change in the framework of more equality, others view reform from the narrow prism of imposing a uniform approach that apparently stems from sectarian and conservative motives. The central and overriding concern of women’s organisations such as the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) was the question of equality, said Kirti Singh, senior advocate in the Supreme Court, and this included equality within their communities. In her experience, women’s groups, including AIDWA, have had to encounter resistance from multiple levels of patriarchy across communities.
The demand for a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) by certain political parties was rooted in the need for equality as seen from a certain standpoint. The approach to the UCC, said Kirti Singh, began getting defined in very difficult, unequal and political terms by parties like the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which seemed to suggest that Hindu laws were the ideal laws and that all other laws in some sense should be like Hindu laws. Both the BJP and the Congress had opportunistic views, one in support of the UCC and the other in opposition to it, with an eye on votes.
“We distanced ourselves from these groups, the BJP’s position on the UCC as well as from sections within the Muslim communities who were against any reform from within and wrongly argued that it was against the tenets of their religion. We emphasised that we wanted equality within different communities and the ending of discrimination against women within the family too,” she said.
The experience of women’s groups during the Shah Bano agitation showed that women within the Muslim community were also keen for reform of the law, which patriarchal elements within the community opposed in the name of religion. In the 1990s, several Muslim reform groups began advocating reform within Muslim Personal Law, and Kirti Singh said women’s groups, including AIDWA, pushed for a two-pronged strategy to bring about common, equal laws in areas such as matrimonial property and registration of marriages. It became apparent that the sections opposing reform within religions also articulated from time to time a narrow and biased interpretation of religion as well.
http://www.frontline.in/cover-story/for-equal-laws/article5037793.ece
'Amended Marriage Laws Bill 2010 will harm interest of husbands'
NAGPUR: Not happy with Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill 2010 tabled in Parliament on August 26, men's rights activist Rajesh Vakharia
of 'Save Indian Family Foundation', Nagpur chapter, says that the law
is against the principles of natural justice. "Statements in support of
this law were grossly misleading and downright incorrect," says
Vakharia.
He feels that only lawyers will welcome such a law which gives power to law enforcement systems. "When the government planned to amend Criminal Procedure Code to reduce arrests under Section 498A to stop its misuse, lawyers protested against this move claiming they will not be able to make big money from bail fees from men and their families," says Vakharia.
Vakharia's view is that if the bill is passed by Parliament, then husbands will lose their hard-earned property if their marriage breaks. They will face false cases under Section 498A, Domestic Violence Act, Section 125 CrPC, etc. and get extorted further.
They may also lose custody of their children to their estranged wife and will become bankrupt if their wife decides to leave or if they are unhappy in the marriage.
"All I want is that the law minister should call for an open debate on the pros and cons of this law," he says. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Amended-Marriage-Laws-Bill-2010-will-harm-interest-of-husbands/articleshow/22228527.cms
He feels that only lawyers will welcome such a law which gives power to law enforcement systems. "When the government planned to amend Criminal Procedure Code to reduce arrests under Section 498A to stop its misuse, lawyers protested against this move claiming they will not be able to make big money from bail fees from men and their families," says Vakharia.
Vakharia's view is that if the bill is passed by Parliament, then husbands will lose their hard-earned property if their marriage breaks. They will face false cases under Section 498A, Domestic Violence Act, Section 125 CrPC, etc. and get extorted further.
They may also lose custody of their children to their estranged wife and will become bankrupt if their wife decides to leave or if they are unhappy in the marriage.
"All I want is that the law minister should call for an open debate on the pros and cons of this law," he says. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Amended-Marriage-Laws-Bill-2010-will-harm-interest-of-husbands/articleshow/22228527.cms
Sunday, 1 September 2013
Stop legal terrorism to save Indian families!
See the last article on this page...
http://northernindiapatrika.in/epaper/archieve/page7.php?id=2013-08-30
http://northernindiapatrika.in/epaper/archieve/page7.php?id=2013-08-30
Lawyer felicitated for contribution in cause of men
ALLAHABAD:
A High Court lawyer Arvind Kumar Pandey was felicitated by a section of
lawyers for receiving an award at fifth National Men's Rights
Conference held in Nagpur recently, for outstanding
contribution in championing the cause of men in national and
International arena, during a programme organized at Indian Coffee House
on Saturday.
Addressing the lawyers, Arivind Kumar Pandey said, "Biased criminal laws have spoiled the lives of many men charged under the Dowry Act. The laws like Domestic Violence Act, IPC 498 a, and Maintenance Act, to name a few are heavily tilted in favour of women and have done more harm than producing good effects."
The Men's Rights National conference, held at Pench Tiger Reserve in Nagpur was attended by more than 150 men's rights activists, who represented 40,000 activists spread across India and other parts of the globe.
This year's national conference was held under the aegis of Nagpur Chapter of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), now being run by Rajesh Vakharia. Few prominent International Men's Rights Associations like Marital Justice from United Kingdom and INSAAF from USA besides Men's Rights activists from Germany, Singapore, Japan, Australia, South Africa, Middle East, Japan and Russia also attended the conference.
Informing about the resolutions passed at fifth Men's Rights conference Arvind Kumar Pandey, who attended the conference as a writer and blogger said, "The first resolution was aimed at formation of Men's Welfare Ministry while the next resolution aimed at reducing the number of men involved in hazardous professions and another important resolution dealt with creation of gender-neutral treatment in legal aspects. Recognition of the rights of fathers, making shared parenting necessary in wake of separation was another major demand made on the occasion. The activists were unanimous in rejecting the highly biased Marriage Law Amendment Bill, 2010, and demanded its roll back. Lastly, the need to make huge investment in areas of Men's health was deeply felt."
The felicitation ceremony at Coffee House, Allahabad, was attended by advocates including Neeraj Shukla, Sampanna Kumar Srivastava, Ashish Nigam, Satyadhar Dubey, Arvind Kushwaha, Pintu Jaiswal, Shubhranshu Pandey, Arun Prakash Srivastava, Mohit Kesarwani and few others.http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/allahabad/Lawyer-felicitated-for-contribution-in-cause-of-men/articleshow/22197623.cms
Addressing the lawyers, Arivind Kumar Pandey said, "Biased criminal laws have spoiled the lives of many men charged under the Dowry Act. The laws like Domestic Violence Act, IPC 498 a, and Maintenance Act, to name a few are heavily tilted in favour of women and have done more harm than producing good effects."
The Men's Rights National conference, held at Pench Tiger Reserve in Nagpur was attended by more than 150 men's rights activists, who represented 40,000 activists spread across India and other parts of the globe.
This year's national conference was held under the aegis of Nagpur Chapter of Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), now being run by Rajesh Vakharia. Few prominent International Men's Rights Associations like Marital Justice from United Kingdom and INSAAF from USA besides Men's Rights activists from Germany, Singapore, Japan, Australia, South Africa, Middle East, Japan and Russia also attended the conference.
Informing about the resolutions passed at fifth Men's Rights conference Arvind Kumar Pandey, who attended the conference as a writer and blogger said, "The first resolution was aimed at formation of Men's Welfare Ministry while the next resolution aimed at reducing the number of men involved in hazardous professions and another important resolution dealt with creation of gender-neutral treatment in legal aspects. Recognition of the rights of fathers, making shared parenting necessary in wake of separation was another major demand made on the occasion. The activists were unanimous in rejecting the highly biased Marriage Law Amendment Bill, 2010, and demanded its roll back. Lastly, the need to make huge investment in areas of Men's health was deeply felt."
The felicitation ceremony at Coffee House, Allahabad, was attended by advocates including Neeraj Shukla, Sampanna Kumar Srivastava, Ashish Nigam, Satyadhar Dubey, Arvind Kushwaha, Pintu Jaiswal, Shubhranshu Pandey, Arun Prakash Srivastava, Mohit Kesarwani and few others.http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/allahabad/Lawyer-felicitated-for-contribution-in-cause-of-men/articleshow/22197623.cms
Thursday, 29 August 2013
HC asks sessions court to decide on bail plea of Yukta`s husband
MUMBAI: The Bombay HC on Wednesday asked a sessions court to decide on the anticipatory bail plea filed by former Miss World Yukta Mookhey's estranged husband Prince Tuli on August 30.
"The sessions judge has not taken into consideration that the offence under Section 498A is a continuing offence," said Justice Sadhna Jadhav. She said the trial judge did not consider the 15 non-cognisable offences, proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and two complaints filed by Yukta. She had challenged the interim protection to Tuli and the sessions judge's observation that a case under Section 498 A could not be made out.
Additional public prosecutor P P Shinde told the high court that the investigation officer would place before the sessions court all the materials in the case, including the complaints filed by Mookhey. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/HC-asks-sessions-court-to-decide-on-bail-plea-of-Yuktas-husband/articleshow/22130136.cms
"The sessions judge has not taken into consideration that the offence under Section 498A is a continuing offence," said Justice Sadhna Jadhav. She said the trial judge did not consider the 15 non-cognisable offences, proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act and two complaints filed by Yukta. She had challenged the interim protection to Tuli and the sessions judge's observation that a case under Section 498 A could not be made out.
Additional public prosecutor P P Shinde told the high court that the investigation officer would place before the sessions court all the materials in the case, including the complaints filed by Mookhey. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/HC-asks-sessions-court-to-decide-on-bail-plea-of-Yuktas-husband/articleshow/22130136.cms
Wednesday, 28 August 2013
Bill weathers‘anti-men’ cry
SOBHANA K.
|
New Delhi, Aug. 26: The
Rajya Sabha today passed amendments to the divorce law but not before
several male members dubbed them anti-men and an assault on “human
rights”.
The Marriage Laws
(Amendment) Bill, passed by the Lok Sabha in the last session, promises
women a larger share of their husband’s property during divorce. (See chart)
Trinamul Congress member Derek O’Brien led the charge, asking: “Why empower women at the expense of men?”
He argued the bill
should be made gender-neutral, giving men the same rights as women.
Replace the words “wife” and “husband” in the bill with “spouse”,
O’Brien said.
Samajwadi Party member Arvind Kumar Singh claimed the bill could be misused like the anti-dowry law.
“If you read this
bill, it seems that husbands alone are responsible for divorce. This law
is being made to enslave men. One party should not get
disproportionately high benefits while the other stands to lose all,”
Singh said.
While many women MPs protested against this logic, Vandana Chavan of the Nationalist Congress Party stood on the men’s side.
“There are many
women who may be earning the same as their husbands or sometimes even
more. We have to fight not just for women’s rights but for human
rights. Why make the current generation of men suffer?” Chavan said.
Many members wanted know how unemployed husbands fared in the bill.
“If the husband
has no property, does he have a right over the (wife’s) property in
case of a divorce?” asked Bahujan Samaj Party member Narender Kumar
Kashyap.
Bharat Kumar Raut
of the Shiv Sena said the bill would bring family pressure on women not
to get a divorce. “Families will think that despite couples having
differences, it would be better to stay together to avoid a division of
the property,” Raut said.
DMK member Kanimozhi defended the bill stoutly.
“That women will
misuse the bill and use it (to seek) revenge against their husbands and
mothers-in-law seems to be the dominant thought here. When we have 50
per cent women in this House, we will talk about making such bills
gender-neutral,” she said.
BJP members,
however, ignored the issue as they pressed their long-standing demand
for a uniform civil code. Party member Najma Heputallah accused the
government of ignoring the plight of the country’s Muslim women.
Law minister Kapil
Sibal said the bill was obviously pro-women and would send a clear
message that Parliament was on the women’s side.
“Women’s rights
have to be protected. We are in a patriarchal society. Around the world,
while women constitute 50 per cent of the population, they own only 2
per cent of global assets,” Sibal said.
Addressing
members’ concern about unemployed husbands, Sibal said men were
entitled to alimony “under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act”. The
bill was cleared as presented by the government.
The Rajya Sabha later discussed the Mumbai gang rape, with junior home minister R.P.N. Singh making a statement.
Monday, 26 August 2013
Indian men treated as Collateral Damage
Collateral Damage is what I begin to feel can best describe the
situation for treatment of men in India, after watching a discussion by
parliamentarians. The Indian parliament passed a bill that would amend
the Hindu Marriage Law introducing new grounds of divorce under a
situation described as “Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage.” Needless
to say it is heavily loaded against men and is being passed on as
“social justice.”
India had a hierarchical caste system, wherein the lower castes were denied certain opportunities, while the higher castes carried certain responsibilities and enjoyed liberties. In some ways, when the question of emancipation of the neglected came, it was found justifiable that sharing the limited resources by denying rights to one section and handing it over to another was social justice.
Later another form of social justice came up. This time with the baggage of a false notion of “patriarchy,” India was convinced that women have been deprived of rights and they need empowerment. Although, the definition of women remained, and even now remains only restricted to, being a wife. Any other role of woman in a household -mothers and sisters of a husband- does not evoke the same emotions due to some convoluted perception of a marital set-up by feminists and their backers.
Laws after laws are being created, which are being called pro-women, but in reality are only anti-men. When the flaws in these laws are highlighted the arguments usually end-up with mentioning of the historical disadvantage that women have had in India. Misandry like a hydra-headed monster rises in all of its forms. Somehow, it has become acceptable to unnecessarily punish the men of today to try to salvage the situation of women.
The men of my generation have begun to wonder if they are being used as fodder, so that the proponents of social justice could counter the sense of guilt in their hearts. Every politician we meet says he understands we are being discriminated against. Every person agreed that the law being framed for Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage was biased against men. Most tried to explain to us how the society in general is going through a transitional phase and ‘some’ men will suffer until equilibrium is attained. Never mind that they want to dismiss the facts about the ‘some’ men being a humungous number of 65000 married men committing suicide every year in India. The urge for the soothsayers to live in denial, makes them forget that the figure means every 7 minutes a married man commits suicide in India.
They can continue to become reason for someone’s death. But we refuse to become ‘Collateral Damage’ in their process of attaining self-satisfaction to achieve some irrational form of social justice. The Men’s rights movement in India is only getting stronger and it reflects in today’s discussion on the amendment to the marriage law in Rajya Sabha – the upper house of parliament. The discussion on this law has been another landmark for men’s rights in India, with many members from opposition regional political parties voicing the agenda of men’s rights in parliament which will go on record in the annals of history. The Law Minister had to misinform the house, at certain points to gain support, for e.g. he said the bill is gender neutral, when he knows it is not – a husband cannot oppose a petition filed by a wife, property(self-acquired before or after marriage, inherited and also inheritable) of only the husband is considered for division. The statements will be well documented in the records. History will judge that the people who brought this law were on the wrong side of justice.
The discussion has been storified here http://storify.com/antidespondent/irretrievable-breakdown-of-marriage-discussion-in
The only fear is the passage of this law, should not accelerate the numbers of suicides by men, who might feel there is no hope of help from the society. Thereby lies, the next challenge for the men’s rights activists in India, to continue reaching out to a populace of 500 million men.
India had a hierarchical caste system, wherein the lower castes were denied certain opportunities, while the higher castes carried certain responsibilities and enjoyed liberties. In some ways, when the question of emancipation of the neglected came, it was found justifiable that sharing the limited resources by denying rights to one section and handing it over to another was social justice.
Later another form of social justice came up. This time with the baggage of a false notion of “patriarchy,” India was convinced that women have been deprived of rights and they need empowerment. Although, the definition of women remained, and even now remains only restricted to, being a wife. Any other role of woman in a household -mothers and sisters of a husband- does not evoke the same emotions due to some convoluted perception of a marital set-up by feminists and their backers.
Laws after laws are being created, which are being called pro-women, but in reality are only anti-men. When the flaws in these laws are highlighted the arguments usually end-up with mentioning of the historical disadvantage that women have had in India. Misandry like a hydra-headed monster rises in all of its forms. Somehow, it has become acceptable to unnecessarily punish the men of today to try to salvage the situation of women.
The men of my generation have begun to wonder if they are being used as fodder, so that the proponents of social justice could counter the sense of guilt in their hearts. Every politician we meet says he understands we are being discriminated against. Every person agreed that the law being framed for Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage was biased against men. Most tried to explain to us how the society in general is going through a transitional phase and ‘some’ men will suffer until equilibrium is attained. Never mind that they want to dismiss the facts about the ‘some’ men being a humungous number of 65000 married men committing suicide every year in India. The urge for the soothsayers to live in denial, makes them forget that the figure means every 7 minutes a married man commits suicide in India.
They can continue to become reason for someone’s death. But we refuse to become ‘Collateral Damage’ in their process of attaining self-satisfaction to achieve some irrational form of social justice. The Men’s rights movement in India is only getting stronger and it reflects in today’s discussion on the amendment to the marriage law in Rajya Sabha – the upper house of parliament. The discussion on this law has been another landmark for men’s rights in India, with many members from opposition regional political parties voicing the agenda of men’s rights in parliament which will go on record in the annals of history. The Law Minister had to misinform the house, at certain points to gain support, for e.g. he said the bill is gender neutral, when he knows it is not – a husband cannot oppose a petition filed by a wife, property(self-acquired before or after marriage, inherited and also inheritable) of only the husband is considered for division. The statements will be well documented in the records. History will judge that the people who brought this law were on the wrong side of justice.
The discussion has been storified here http://storify.com/antidespondent/irretrievable-breakdown-of-marriage-discussion-in
The only fear is the passage of this law, should not accelerate the numbers of suicides by men, who might feel there is no hope of help from the society. Thereby lies, the next challenge for the men’s rights activists in India, to continue reaching out to a populace of 500 million men.
RS approves bill to make divorce friendly for women
The Bill allows both parties to file for divorce on the ground of "irretrievable breakdown" of marriage.
Rajya Sabha on Monday approved a proposal to make divorce friendly for
women as it provides for the wife getting share in the husband’s
immovable property after “irretrievable breakdown” of marriage.
The Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill seeks to empower the courts to decide
the compensation amount from the husband’s inherited and inheritable
property for the wife and children once the marriage legally ends.
The Bill allows both parties to file for divorce on the ground of
“irretrievable breakdown” of marriage. Both parties have to live apart
for at least three years before filing for such a petition.
Provisions have been made to restrict grant of a decree of divorce on
ground of “irretrievable breakdown” of marriage if the court is
satisfied that adequate provision for maintenance of children has not
been made consistently with financial capacity of the parties to the
marriage.
Also, the wife has the right to oppose the grant of a divorce on the
ground that the dissolution could result in grave financial hardship.
Replying to a debate on the bill, Law Minister Kapil Sibal said it is “a
historic peace of legislation” in a patriarchal society like India
where women, who constitute 50 per cent of the population, own only two
per cent of the assets.
He said the divorce is “gender neutral” as either the wife or the
husband can seek divorce. However, the right over property will not be
gender neutral as wife can lay claim on husband’s immovable property.
The Bill also provides that a court can take an ex parte decision on
granting divorce if one of the two parties refuse to move a joint
application.
As per the existing laws, the parties have to move a motion jointly
between 6 and 18 months in case of divorce on grounds of mutual consent.
However, it has been observed that in several cases one of the parties
do not turn up for filing of motion jointly with the other party leading
the party desirous of divorce hapless and remediless.
The amendment has been done to mitigate such hardships, said the statement of objects and reasons of the Bill.
During discussions, several MPs across party lines suggested the Bill be
made gender neutral and should not be confined to Hindu marriages only.
The Bill seeks to amend Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Mr. Sibal, however, noted that the legislation is in context of Hindu
Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act, a couple has a choice to get
registered under the Special Marriage Act.
He said it would be the courts that would decided about the division of property post divorce.
“We have to trust our judges...Judges...will decide what (amount of) property will given to women,” he said.
The Minister, however, said there was no amendment which works against women and works in favour of men.
He said the Members of Parliament should show that they are on side of women in a patriarchal society.
Earlier, Najma A. Heptulla (BJP) said divorce is considered a taboo in
India and efforts should be made to ensure that family structure remains
intact.
She accused the government of not doing anything for the 10 crore women
belonging to Muslim community. She promised BJP’s support to any
legislation for betterment of Muslim women.
She also said there should be only one law for all women in the country.
As per the statement of objects and reasons of the bill, Hindu Marriage
Act and the Special Marriage Act have proved to be inadequate to deal
with the issue where there has been irretrievable breakdown of marriage
and therefore the need was felt for the amendments.
Supreme Court too had pointed out the necessity to introduce
irretrievable breakdown of marriage and mutual consent as grounds for
grant of divorce in all cases.
“Having regards to the recommendations of the Law Commission of India
and the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court...it is proposed to
amend the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the Special Marriage Act, 1954,
so as to provide for irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground of
divorce thereunder subject to certain safeguards to the wife and
affected children,” the statement said.
The Law Minister said husbands too can move courts for irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Ram Prakash (Cong), Narendra Kumar Kashyap (BSP), Jharna Das Baidya
(CPI-M), Derek O’ Brien (TMC), Arvind Kumar Singh (SP), Renubala Pradhan
(BJD), Vandana Chavan (NCP), Bharatkumar Raut (SS) and Gyan Prakash
Pilania (BJP) also participated in the discussion.
Tuesday, 20 August 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)