Bombay high court questions early release of women jailed for murder

Bombay high court questions early release of women jailed for murder

MUMBAI: Can a person sentenced to life imprisonment for murder face less punishment just because she is a woman? The Bombay high court on Tuesday questioned the gender discrimination in the state government's new prison rules.

"This is a dangerous trend," a division bench of Justice S C Dharmadhikari and Justice Gautam Patel said. "Reservations [for women] can be understood, but showing leniency in punishment on the basis of gender cannot be accepted."

The court asked advocate general Darius Khambata to assist the court on the matter when it hears the case on September 19. The court was hearing a plea for early release from prison by a woman convicted of murdering her husband on the basis of the rules introduced by the government in 2010.

While a woman murder convict sent to prison for life faces minimum imprisonment of between 18 years and 20 years in jail with remissions, men face 20 years to 30 years, depending on the gravity of the crime. Remissions are extra days credited for each day spent in jail.

"Prima facie, we do not see any positive discrimination [in the rules to benefit female convicts] which either improves the dignity or status of women in society," the judges said.

The court pointed out that they had observed many reports in newspapers about women committing serious crimes, including being involved in sexual assault cases. "While the new rules introduce stringent punishment for crimes against women, in the same breath someone who has wronged another woman can get off lightly because of her gender," the judges said.

The court questioned the state on the justification for such a classification on the basis of gender.

"A case-to-case-basis decision on the prison term can be taken by going into the circumstances, but a classification solely on the basis of gender is a dangerous trend," the court said. "The rules do not meet the purpose that they will not be encouraged to commit crimes. Instead, it gives a licence to women that because of their DNA they can get off easily even if they commit a serious crime."

In 2010, the state government had introduced changes to the guidelines for premature release of prisoners under the 14-year rule. According to law, a punishment of life imprisonment awarded to an accused means jail till death. Yet, depending on the severity of the crime, the rules allow a person to be released early from prison once he completes 14 years of actual imprisonment.

The new rules created a new category for women convicts. Those who had committed murder were eligible for release from jail once they had served 18 years, including remissions. If the murder was premeditated, they could be released after 20 years with remissions. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Bombay-high-court-questions-early-release-of-women-jailed-for-murder/articleshow/22304543.cms 

Marriage Amendment Bill - Draconian Law

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAzVwu1oBXM

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 

PIL questions immediate arrests in dowry harassment cases

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://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/PIL-questions-immediate-arrests-in-dowry-harassment-cases/articleshow/20980608.cms 

Woman tramples live-in partner to death

Woman tramples live-in partner to death

CHENNAI: Police on Saturday claimed to have solved the July 2 murder of a real estate agent in Thirukazhukundram, 45km from Chennai, with the arrest of his live-in partner.

Serena, 32, trampled Suresh Kumar, 31, to death when he was asleep because he had objected to her friendship with a woman named Gowri, police said. Kumar was heavily drunk at the time. She then hung his body from the ceiling.

The next morning she alerted neighbours saying she had woken up to find Kumar hanging. Soon, police arrived on the scene and began investigations. Not convinced with Serena's answers, police registered a case of murder but initially suspected the hand of an outsider. "However, Serena remained on the list of suspects list as she was present in the house at the time," a police officer said.
It was thought that he had been strangled, but the injury on one side of the neck ruled out this possibility. The usual marks associated with it were absent, police said. But the symptoms present made it clear he was murdered.
Unable to make up their minds about the cause of death, police again turned their attention to Serena after rejecting the chances of an outsider having committing the crime. She was taken to the police station and questioned separately by a team of women personnel. She finally confessed to the killing.
Inquiries revealed that Suresh Kumar, a resident of Vallam near Chengalpet, had been living with Serena for the past couple of years. Serena, whose husband lived and worked abroad, resided at a house in Thirukazhukundram with her son and daughter. Trouble began between the couple when Suresh Kumar objected to Serena's friendship with Gowri and they often fought over the issue.
At night on July 1, a fresh altercation broke out over the subject before the couple went to sleep. Later, Serena woke up and trod on Kumar's neck with her foot, according to her confession statement. She later hung the body from the ceiling and went to sleep.
Serena has been remanded in judicial custody.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-07/chennai/40420329_1_serena-suresh-kumar-live-in-partner

Daughters-in-law abuse elderly more, says HelpAge India study

Daughters-in-law abuse elderly more, says HelpAge India study 

Daughters-in-law are the worst abusers of the elderly in homes in Thiruvananthapuram, a study conducted by HelpAge India says.

The study, covering 24 cities including the Kerala capital, released here on Friday, says that daughters-in-law constituted 44 per cent of the abusers, followed by daughters (32 per cent) and sons (24 per cent). The study was released to mark World Elder Abuse Awareness Day on Saturday.

The report says that the elders’ perception of abuse constituted neglect (38 per cent), economic exploitation (27 per cent), and disrespect (35 per cent). Among the abused, 24 per cent made an attempt to report it, their first choice being a community leader. Their second choice was the local police and the third choice relatives, friends, and NGOs.

Those who did not report abuse did so in order to maintain confidentiality of family matters; ignorance about the best way to deal with the problem; or lack of confidence in the ability of the person or agency.

Twenty two per cent of those surveyed reported experiencing abuse, 34 per cent of them experienced abuse for three to five years. For 33 per cent of the respondents, abuse was a daily experience. Among those who reported abuse, 89 per cent of the elderly belong to age group of 60-70 years, 10 per cent to 71-80 years. The mean age of those who reported abuse was 65 years. Forty five per cent of respondents were postgraduates, 25 per cent graduates. Among them, 85 per cent were married and 14 per cent were widows or widowers, the study says.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Thiruvananthapuram/daughtersinlaw-abuse-elderly-more-says-helpage-india-study/article4817075.ece 

Missing activist's bones found, wife killed him

Missing activist's bones found, wife killed him

NEW DELHI: Six months after a social activist and local communist leader from Bawana in north Delhi went missing under mysterious circumstances, the crime branch has disclosed that he was murdered by his wife and her brothers-in-law.

The cops have recovered the skeleton and other remnants of Ramcharan Ram (60) and arrested his wife Janki Devi (45) and her brother-in-law Vinod Kumar (35). Cops are still looking for another accused, Jhagru, who is also Janki's brother-in-law. Vinod and Jhagru are self styled godmen.

Janki was afraid of losing the property as Ram was having an affair, police said, adding that her brothers-in-law were enraged after the leader brutally thrashed his wife.

The case was cracked after the special operation squad (SOS) of crime branch received a tip-off that the missing leader may have been murdered and buried by his wife and brothers-in-law. The informer said that the accused were trying to flee to Bihar. "Immediately, a team led by ACP Suresh Kaushik and inspector Ashok Kumar was formed to arrest the accused," said additional CP Ravindra Yadav said.

The SOS team apprehended Janki and Vinod, who were packing their bags, from their house in Bawana. During questioning, both tried to mislead the police team but broke down under sustained interrogation and confessed to have murdered Ram.

The accused revealed that Ram sold one of his houses for around Rs 7 lakh and purchased another house for Rs 4 lakh. Janki said Ram had developed an illicit relation with a woman in the area and had spent the remaining amount received from the sale of the house on her.

This led to frequent quarrels between the couple and Ram often beat her up, Janki claimed. They had a big fight when Janki caught him trying to take away property documents of the house with intentions of transferring it on the woman's name.

In December 2012, she shared her problem with Vinod and Jhagru, who assured to help her. For two weeks before the murder, the accused held Ram captive in a room on the first floor of his house. They told the neighbours that he had gone to his native village.

On the New Year's Eve, they made Ram consume a lot of alcohol but he did not get drunk enough. The next day, they made him drink more alcohol until he was extremely inebriated and then Jhagru smothered Ram with a pillow while Vinod and Janki pinned down his hands, police said.

That night, they could not dispose of the body. Next evening, when there was dense fog, they put the body in a gunny bag and took it to a nearby isolated field and buried it in a pit. Yadav said they had recovered the skeleton and remnants of the body on the instance of the accused with the help of a mobile crime team and forensic experts.  http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Missing-activists-bones-found-wife-killed-him/articleshow/20963903.cms 

Women named in dowry harassment jump before train

Women named in dowry harassment jump before train

JAIPUR: Depressed over a case of dowry harassment lodged against them, a woman and her 30-year-old daughter committed suicide by jumping before a train in Bikaner on Saturday. The case had been registered by the woman's daughter-in-law last month.
According to the police, the victims, Kiran Puri, a widow (54) and her daughter Gitika (30) were residents of Pawanpuri area.

"Kiran's son had a dispute with his wife. After which the wife accused him, Kiran and Gitika of dowry harassment. They claimed that they were innocent and were being harassed," said a police officer.
After lodging the FIR last month, the police arrested the husband, his mother Kiran and his sister Gitika. "While the man was sent to judicial custody, Kiran and Gitika were released on bail," said the officer.
On Saturday, Kiran and Gitika went to the railway tracks near Vyas Colony in Bikaner around 4am and jumped before a train. While Kiran died on the spot, Gitika was rushed to hospital in critical condition. She also succumbed to injuries while undergoing treatment.
"We have launched an investigation whether the two women were harassed," said the officer. 

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-07/jaipur/40420237_1_police-officer-bikaner-railway-tracks 

What India’s New ‘Anti-Rape’ Bill Actually Says

What India’s New ‘Anti-Rape’ Bill Actually Says

NEW DELHI–After clearing the Lok Sabha or lower house of Parliament earlier this week, a bill to toughen India’s laws on sexual offenses is being debated in the upper house on Thursday.
The bill, which will amend India’s penal code and laws of criminal procedure and evidence, was drafted in response to widespread street protests after the fatal gang rape of a 23-year-old woman in Delhi in December.
Among the significant provisions of the bill, seen by India Ink, are longer sentences for sex offenders, a broader definition of rape and punishments for other sex crimes like stalking and voyeurism.
Here are some of the bill’s crucial changes:
– Women’s rights advocates and victims of sexual offenses have long accused a male-dominated police force of refusing to register complaints by women, and even facilitating a monetary settlement or brokering a marriage between victims of rape and the accused.
The bill lays down punishment for police officers who fail to record the initial complaint, known as the first information report, of a woman who alleges she was attacked with acid, assaulted by a man who intended to molest her or “outrage her modesty,” stripped naked or raped. Such officers can receive jail terms of six months to two years.
– The bill creates a separate offense to address acid attacks, common in South Asian countries, especially by men who are spurned by women they express an interest in.
Under the bill, those convicted of throwing acid on a woman, causing “permanent or partial damage or deformity,” or maiming or disfiguring her, will be punished with prison sentences ranging from 10 years to life and a fine.
With an eye to the rehabilitation of the victim, the bill says the fine should be paid to the woman as compensation.
– The bill defines sexual harassment, which includes “physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures,” a demand for sexual favors and showing pornography to a woman who does not want to see it. Those convicted of harassment can receive prison sentences of up to three years.
Making “sexually colored” remarks is also included in the definition of sexual harassment, for which the bill prescribes a prison sentence of up to a year.
– The bill criminalizes the forced stripping of women, or disrobing, in public spaces or in private confines, with a minimum jail term of three years and a maximum of seven. Under the current law, disrobing a woman is not a separate offense.
– One of the more controversial provisions in the bill is the section on voyeurism, which seeks to punish men who watch or photograph women who are conducting a “private act,” such as bathing, using the toilet or having sex.
The bill lays down a punishment of three to seven years in prison for those convicted of voyeurism more than once.
Voyeurism is not a separate offense under the current law.
– The bill creates another new, and much-debated, offense: stalking. This provision deals with men who follow a woman and establish contact with her or attempt to do so “to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest” by the woman.
E-stalking, or monitoring of a woman’s activities online, such as browsing or checking of e-mail, has also been made punishable.
A man convicted of stalking once can be sentenced to a term of up to three years, and if convicted again can receive a sentence of up to five years.
– The bill expands the definition of rape to include not just penovaginal intercourse but the insertion of an object or any other body part into a woman’s vagina, urethra or anus, and oral sex.
This responds to a longstanding demand of women’s rights groups. The issue of rape by different means was highlighted in the Delhi gang-rape case, where an iron rod was inserted into the young woman’s body.
Prison sentences for rape can range from seven years to life. The current law allows courts to hand down a sentence of less than seven years for “adequate and special reasons,” a provision omitted in the bill.
– The bill raises the age of consent for sex to 18. This means that intercourse with a woman under 18 is statutory rape and courts conducting rape trials cannot consider whether the woman consented to having sex. It also, in effect, criminalizes consensual sex with women under 18, a subject of much controversy.
– The bill does not make marital rape an offense, ignoring a longstanding demand of women’s rights advocates.
– The bill takes a tough stand on rape by public servants. Under the current law, when a rape is committed by a police officer or prison staff, those convicted can be punished with sentences ranging from 10 years to life.
The bill clarifies that imprisonment for life means the convict must remain in prison till the end of his natural life.
The bill also allows women to bring a complaint of rape against members of the armed forces.
– When a rape leaves a woman dead or in a “persistent vegetative state,” the bill demands a minimum sentence of 20 years in prison and a maximum punishment of death. This is the first time that the death penalty is being prescribed for sexual offenses in India, which, unlike nearly all European nations, retains the death sentence, but uses it only in the “rarest of rare cases.”
– The bill increases the minimum punishment for gang rape from 10 years imprisonment to 20 years, and the maximum punishment to life imprisonment.
– The bill provides for life imprisonment or death for repeat offenders convicted of rape and gang rape.
– The bill makes procedural changes to address concerns that women are uncomfortable or intimidated by male police officers, or are treated with insensitivity when they approach police stations to register complaints of sex crimes.
The bill requires that all initial reports involving sexual harassment, disrobing, voyeurism, stalking, rape and gang rape be taken by women officers only.
– In order to ensure speedy trial, the bill requires that rape trials be completed “as far as possible” within two months from the time the police file charges against the accused.

http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/21/what-indias-anti-rape-bill-actually-says/

SC cautions on slapping murder charge in dowry death case

SC cautions on slapping murder charge in dowry death case 

HDFC Bank’s 30 year home loan New Delhi, July 4: In dowry death cases, the trial courts should not mechanically frame a murder charge against the accused unless there is prima facie evidence supporting the finding, the Supreme Court has said. "The question whether it is murder punishable under Section 302 IPC or a dowry death punishable under Section 304B IPC depends upon the fact, situation and the evidence in the case," said the apex court bench of Justice TS Thakur and Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai in a recent judgment. "If there is evidence whether direct or circumstantial to prima facie support a charge under Section 302 IPC, the trial court can and indeed ought to frame a charge of murder punishable under Section 302 IPC, which would then be the main charge and not an alternative charge as is erroneously assumed in some quarters," said Justice Thakur pronouncing the judgment. If the main charge of murder was not proved against the accused at the trial, the court could look into the evidence to determine whether the alternative charge of dowry death punishable under Section 304B was established, the apex court said. The ingredients constituting the two offences were different, thereby demanding appreciation of evidence from the perspective relevant to such ingredients, the bench said. A charge under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was not a substitute for a charge of murder punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, the court said. The court said this while clarifying its earlier order of Nov 22, 2010, which was being "mechanically" read to invoke the charge of murder in every dowry death case. The apex court by its interim order had directed all trial courts to ordinarily add Section 302 of the IPC to the charge under Section 304B "so that death sentences could be imposed in such heinous and barbaric crimes against women". Setting aside a Delhi High Court order upholding the addition of murder charges by the trial court in pursuance to the apex court's Nov 22, 2010, interim order, Justice Thakur and Justice Desai said: "That was not, in our opinion, the true purport of the order passed by this court." Clarifying the Nov 22, 2010, interim order, the apex court said: "The direction was not meant to be followed mechanically and without due regard to the nature of the evidence available in the case." "All that this court meant to say was that in a case where a charge alleging dowry death is framed, a charge under Section 302 can also be framed if the evidence otherwise permits," the judgment said. It is common ground that a charge under Section 304B IPC is not a substitute for a charge of murder punishable under Section 302. The court said this while addressing the question whether the high court was justified in affirming the trial court decision to add murder charge against Jasvinder Saini and others who were under penal provisions for punishment for cruelty against woman by her husband and his relatives, dowry death and criminal breach of trust. Initially while framing the charges, the trial court did not find any evidence to invoke the murder charge but added it after the apex court's Nov 22, 2010, interim order. Saini and his relatives were named as accused in the case of his wife Chandni's death under unnatural circumstance.

http://www.samachar.com/SC-cautions-on-slapping-murder-charge-in-dowry-death-case-nheuM3hdbbj.html

Singer Hemanth accused of dowry harassment

Singer Hemanth accused of dowry harassment

Domestic controversies don't seem to leave the Kannada industry people, after the news of Duniya Vijay filing for divorce, comes the news of popular singer, Hemanth, being accused of dowry harassment by his wife, Priyadarshini.

According to sources, the police have registered a B Report in the case and filed the same to court, which means that there is no evidence in the dowry case. In 2009, Priyadarshini had filed a complaint against Hemanth and his family following which, Hemanth was arrested and spent two days in jail before he was released on bail.

It has been alleged that now the couple is involved in a settlement issue over the payment of one-time alimony. It seems to now have shadowed hemanth's career which he had managed to salvage bit by bit. However, the cops deciding that the case is false will be a major boost for Hemanth.  http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/regional/kannada/news-interviews/Singer-Hemanth-accused-of-dowry-harassment/articleshow/20927625.cms 

What if you're in her shoes, SC asks rejecting man's divorce plea

What if you're in her shoes, SC asks rejecting man's divorce plea

New Delhi: A man's plea for divorce on the grounds that their marriage is beyond salvage and that he will pay a substantial alimony to his wife has been dismissed by the Supreme Court saying that the husband would have never accepted dissolution of matrimonial ties had the wife raised identical reasons.
The court made the observation while rejecting the plea for divorce by the husband who had contended that though his wife's mental condition was normal, they have been separated for over 12 years and as such their marriage has irretrievably broken down. Also he said that he is willing to pay his wife any amount determined by the court as alimony.
A bench of justices P. Sathasivam and J.S. Khehar said he cannot be granted divorce "for the simple reason that the breakdown is only from the side of the husband" while the wife has consistently maintained that her paramount desire was to rejoin her husband."
"We would in our endeavour to determine the issue in hand examine the matter by reversing roles of the parties. We will examine the matter as if the wife had approached the Family Court seeking divorce on the ground that her husband had suffered brain damage leading to cognitive deficiencies.
"Yet, despite the said deficiencies, his working memory had returned to ‘near normal’ after treatment. "And his mental condition was such, that it would not have any effect on his matrimonial obligations. And the wife's family is agreeable to pay an amount to be determined by this court, so as to enable their daughter to break away, and find a more suitable match.
"Should she have been granted freedom from her matrimonial ties, in the given facts, in order to do complete justice to the parties? We would ask ourselves, whether the husband would have accepted such a plea...?" The court said, "In such situation, if this Court had, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, granted compensation to the husband and had dissolved his marriage on the pretext of doing complete justice between the parties, would the same be acceptable to the husband? "We have no doubt in our mind, that on a reversal of roles, the husband, without any fault of his own, would have never accepted as just, the dissolution of his matrimonial ties, even if the couple had been separated for a duration, as is the case in hand," the bench said.
It also said the medical condition of the wife, on which the man had based his claim for divorce, was "of his own doing."
The apex court's order came on the appeal by the husband, who had challenged the decision of the Family court in Hyderabad and the Andhra Pradesh High Court which had rejected his plea for divorce from his wife.
The couple were married in 1997 when they were barely out of their teens.
After his wife's second pregnancy resulted in her suffering some mental disorder due to medical complications, he had moved the Family court in 2002 seeking divorce on the ground that she was not mentally sound.
The trial court had refused to grant him any relief saying that apart from his and his family's contentions that she had not recovered, there was no other evidence to support their claim.
The court also noted that as per medical professionals who had examined her, the woman's mental condition was found to be ‘normal’ and also that she was capable of discharging her marital obligations.
The high court had upheld the view of the trial court, and he had moved the apex court. He had contended before the apex court that they have been separated for over 12 years, their marriage is beyond salvage and as he is willing to pay a court determined amount as alimony, their marriage should be dissolved.
The apex court while refusing to grant him relief noted that "we cannot persuade ourselves to grant a decree of divorce, on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, for the simple reason that the breakdown is only from the side of the husband. The wife has consistently maintained, that she was intensely concerned with her future relationship with her husband, and that, her greatest and paramount desire was to rejoin her husband."
The bench also said that it was the husband himself who was ‘responsible for the state of affairs of his wife’.
 

 

http://www.deccanchronicle.com/130702/news-current-affairs/article/what-if-youre-her-shoes-sc-asks-rejecting-mans-divorce-plea 

NGO questions rise in cases of cruelty

NGO questions rise in cases of cruelty

Raising concern over the rise in cases of cruelty in West Bengal against women by their husbands or relatives but low rates of conviction, a non-government organisation has approached both the State government and the State Human Rights Commission. 

According to the statistics revealed by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) last month or the year 2012, the number of cases registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in the State was 19,885 — about 18.6 per cent of those recorded in the country, which totalled about 1.06 lakh cases. 

Referring to the NCRB data, members of the city-based NGO “Hridaya,” pointed out that while conviction in the rest of the country in cases registered under the Section was 15 per cent, it stood around 4.4 per cent in West Bengal. 

“This begs the question whether or not most of these cases were registered by the women with the motive of falsely implicating their spouses and his relatives?” Amit Gupta, secretary, Hridaya. 

The NCRB data over the past three years points out that conviction of cases registered under Section 498A varies between four and six per cent while the number of cases has increased by 11 per cent from 2010 to 2012. 

West Bengal registered 30,984 cases of crime against women in 2012 — the highest in the country — of which 64 per cent were registered under Section 498A of the IPC, Mr. Gupta pointed out. 

“Our objective is to spread awareness about the high number of cases registered for cruelty against women by their spouses and relatives. The law enforcement agencies should have specific guidelines to register cases under this section as majority of the cases are not ending in conviction,” he added.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/ngo-questions-rise-in-cases-of-cruelty/article4875713.ece 

'Draconian' amendment in Hindu Marriage Act gives wives final say in divorce cases; men's rights groups not amused

 'Draconian' amendment in Hindu Marriage Act gives wives final say in divorce cases; men's rights groups not amused

Pune: Upset over the latest amendments in the Hindu Marriage Act which virtually give wives a final say in divorce 

 

cases, Men’s Rights Association (MRA) on Saturday staged a protest against the legislation which they term as 'draconian'.

 

"The bill has a provision giving power to the courts to not grant a divorce unless the wife was paid adequate amount of 

 

money in the name of financial security of the woman. Such powers may result in harassment of men," MRA president Atit Rajpara said.

 

He also said the bill also provides special powers to wives to oppose the divorce if she was unhappy with the money she received from the husband under section IPC 498 (A), domestic violence act and several other maintenance laws.

 

According to the MRA, such clauses are outright anti-male and gender-biased and therefore men’s rights activists and organisations are opposing them. Rajpara said the mens’ rights organisations want the bill to be gender-neutral.

http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/MAH-PUN-draconian-amendment-in-hindu-marriage-act-giving-wives-a-final-say-in-divorce-ir-4306641-NOR.html?fb_action_ids=627117723973954&fb_action_types=og.likes&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map={%22627117723973954%22%3A167910723391944}&action_type_map={%22627117723973954%22%3A%22og.likes%22}&action_ref_map=[]

Seventy marriages saved, family court celebrates

Seventy marriages saved, family court celebrates

MUMBAI: "Judges, lawyers and counsellors of the family court need to have the vision to accommodate the needs and aspirations of a changing society where women now have a very clear identity both before and after marriage," said Justice Dhananjay Chandrachud of the Bombay high court on Saturday. The judge was addressing a packed house on the family court premises in Bandra, where 140 men and women on the verge of a split till a few days ago went home together as 70 happy couples.

The family court, its lawyers' association and marriage counsellors had organized a felicitation function for 111 couples who with a little help from their lawyers, counsellors and judges had given up their lengthy and acrimonious legal battle for a divorce, maintenance or custody and had resolved their differences to remain married. Seventy couples showed up, and a few among them who still were vacillating decided to drop their divorce proceedings after hearing Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice Chandrachud of the high court as well as the principal judge of the family court, Laxmi Rao.

Chief Justice Shah felicitated the youngest couple present, who were in their 20s, and stressed that proper and timely mediation could save many a broken marriage. He encouraged more such group reconciliation programmes and promised more facilities for the family court.

Judge Rao said there were several laws that were being misused-such as the Domestic Violence Act-by people "on wrong advice of well-wishers".

She, too, said that with proper intervention, marriages need not end in divorces even when things appear bleak.

President of the Family Court Bar Association advocate Sajan Oommen said: "Family court lawyers must play a more proactive role, as the Family Courts Act is not meant merely for dissolution of marriages but for a solution to matrimonial disputes."

Family court judge Swati Chauhan was the first in April to conduct a group reconciliation of quarrelling couples.

It was her experiment that paved the way for more reconciliations.  http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Seventy-marriages-saved-family-court-celebrates/articleshow/20837521.cms 

Controversy in National Commission for women

Controversy in National Commission for women