Man attempts suicide inside police station as police ignore complaint

Man attempts suicide inside police station as police ignore complaint

A 60-year-old man, tortured by his daughter-in-law, attempted suicide inside a police station in Delhi on Thursday when policemen cold-shouldered his complaint.
Rajbeer Singh consumed a poisonous substance inside west Delhi's Kanjhawala police station premises after police personnel did not pay heed to his complaint against his daughter-in-law.
Singh was rushed to a hospital where his condition was stated to be out of danger.
A police officer said Rajbeer had approached the police station a day ago and informed that his daughter-in-law had thrown him out of his house after usurping his property.
However, the policemen sent him home, telling him to come if his daughter-in-law did not mend her ways.
According to sources, Rajbeer arrived at the police station today (Thursday) but, once again, the policemen turned a deaf ear to his pleas. Frustrated, he then consumed the poisonous substance.

http://m.ibnlive.com/news/man-attempts-suicide-inside-police-station-as-police-ignore-complaint/418299-3-244.html 

Marriage law: The 'Inter Continental Ballistic Missile' of a Bill

The Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, approved by the Rajya Sabha on Monday, has long been pegged the 'Intercontinental Continental Ballistic Missile' (ICBM) Bill by protesting men's groups, for its inclusion of the 'Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage (IBM)' clause as a valid condition for divorce.

Virag Dhulia, a men's rights activist and head of gender studies at the Bangalore-based Confidare Research says, "The Rajya Sabha has betrayed us. We now hope the Lok Sabha MPs will not let us down." Men's groups like Dhulia's partnered with Men's Rights Association, Pune and have been protesting the Bill for months now. In December 2012 they led a rally to Jantar Mantar and courted detention on May 1, 2013 en route the Prime Minister's residence. Their objections to the Bill are that it will blindly give away property in the name of marriage, that men will stop marrying to prevent this, thus destabilizing the institution of marriage.

"Whichever country has these clauses also has supportive laws like a legalization of pre-nuptial agreements, which India doesn't have. India is cherry picking laws that suit them, which can prove disastrous. In 2011, China rolled back a law like this because men had stopped marrying and stopped buying property" Dhulia warns.

But the Bill is in fact far reaching and thought out over a period of decades. The first proposals for amendments to the Hindu Marriage Act came from the Law Commission in 1978. Two more Law Commission reports, several Supreme Court Judgements and after much debate among invested parties led by women's groups like Majlis, the Bill has been tabled.

Chakshu Roy, head of technology initiatives at PRS Legislative Research, New Delhi says, "The Law Commission and the Supreme Court have on a number of occasions recommended the inclusion of irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce. The Law Commission suggested that before a divorce is granted on this ground, the court should ensure adequate financial arrangements have been made for the parties and children. The Bill incorporates these suggestions and introduces this ground for divorce and makes financial provision for the wife and children."

What the Bill essentially says is that there are certain conditions based on which either the husband or wife can apply for divorce. These are cruelty, medical reasons such as communicable diseases, mental illnesses, desertion. The Bill essentially sought to correct the lacuna that arose from the need to dissolve the marriage in the eventuality that none of these stand i.e. the dissolution of marriage due to an organic breakdown.

The Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage clause allows a woman or a man to exit on the premise that she is unfulfilled or unhappy in a marriage after a three year period of separation. The wife also bears the right to block a divorce thrust upon her if she can prove she will be in grave financial hardship. The Bill will also allow the court to consider a waiver of the 6-18 month lock-in period for couples who file by mutual consent.

A huge triumph, points out activist and head of women's group Majlis, Flavia Agnes, is the Bill's determination of the compensation due to the wife. In doing so, the Bill now allows the court to take into account inherited and inheritable properties. This becomes a crucial factor in cases where husbands are able to sell off properties in their name and prove they have no assets, leaving the wife without compensation.

Men's groups protest this clause saying it allows women to divorce a man after five days and "clean him out". Agnes dismisses concerns stating that women have gotten the short end of the stick for far too long.

A lot of the debate has been ill-informed. Advocates state that the court will consider many factors while making such a decision. As any nuclear armed country knows, setting off a missile isn't so simple, there are many check points.

Read more at: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/rajya-sabha-passes-marriage-laws-amendment-bill-2010/1/304271.html

 

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/case-against-ngo-for-forcing-woman-to-file-false-rape-case/1078735/ 

Consensual sex with minor not a crime, Delhi court says

NEW DELHI: A city court has observed that consensual sex with a girl aged below 18 years does not constitute an offence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The court said the provisions of POCSO Act suggest that where a physical relationship — which is not in the nature of an assault — takes place with the minor girl's consent and where the consent has not been obtained unlawfully, no offence can be said to have been committed.

Rejecting the plea of the police and Delhi Commission for Women that POCSO Act prohibits minors from having any kind sexual relationship, additional sessions judge Dharmesh Sharma said, "I am afraid if that interpretation is allowed, it would mean that the human body of every individual under 18 years is the property of the state and no individual below 18 years can be allowed to have pleasures associated with one's body."

ASJ Sharma, however, urged state authorities to spread awareness related to unsafe sex or early marriage. "But there lies a greater responsibility on all of us, the state including police in spreading and creating public awareness about the impact of girl or boy marrying at a tender age or indulging in unsafe sexual activities," he said.

The court made these observations while acquitting a 22-year-old youth of charges of kidnapping and raping a 15-year-old girl whom he later married. The youth, a native of West Bengal, was acquitted of the charges as the court held that the minor, on her own will, accompanied him and obstacles should not be put in their happy married life.

"As the evidence indicates, they got married voluntarily with their free consent. Hence no case is made out under section 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (kidnapping or inducing woman to compel her marriage) of the IPC," the court said.

"In my opinion, it would neither serve the object of present enactment (POCSO Act) nor the purpose of criminal laws to hold the accused guilty on the ground that he had sexual intercourse with the girl below 18 years," the judge said, adding that it would not be good for the girl if her husband was sent to jail. The POCSO Act treats girls and boys below 18 years of age as minors.

"It is high time that state authorities, its machinery, NGOs and women groups made a determined and sustained endeavour to reach out to all in schools, colleges and residential places, thereby creating public awareness on various aspects of life in case of marriage at a tender age... besides creating awareness amongst adolescents and young adults about the serious psychological and physical health issues that such a relation entails," the court observed.

According to the prosecution, a complaint was filed before the police on March 5 by the minor girl's mother about her daughter going missing since February 26.

The accused was arrested on March 6 and the girl was also recovered from his custody, it said. The girl, in her statement recorded before a magistrate, said she had willingly gone with the accused to his native place in Kolkata and they got married in a temple there and since then they have been living together.

During the trial, the youth told the court that the girl had accompanied him to Kolkata on her own and they got married there but he denied having physical relations with her. The court also noted that the marriage was accepted by the girl's mother. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/Consensual-sex-with-minor-not-a-crime-Delhi-court-says/articleshow/22056783.cms 

furniture or luggage given by bride's parents in marriage is not Dowry

आत्महत्या को मजबूर के आरोप में ससुराली नामजद

आत्महत्या को मजबूर के आरोप में ससुराली नामजद

संवाद सूत्र, फरीदकोट : स्थानीय पटेल पार्क के निकट निवासी व फरीदकोट में विवाहित एक महिला के पति द्वारा मानसिक रूप से परेशान होकर नहर में कूदकर आत्महत्या करने के मामले में फरीदकोट पुलिस ने मृतक की माता के बयानों पर मृतका की पत्‍‌नी सहित अबोहर निवासी ससुराल परिवार पर आत्महत्या करने का मामला दर्ज कर लिया है।
जानकारी के अनुसार न्यू कैंट फरीदकोट निवासी आशा रानी ने जिला सीनियर पुलिस कप्तान गुरमीत सिंह रधावा को दी शिकायत में बताया कि उसका बेटा शशि कुमार सरकारी अध्यापक था। उसका अबोहर निवासी अपनी पत्‍‌नी भारती पुत्र मदन लाल के साथ घरेलू झगड़ा चल रहा था। इस पर भारती ने वूमेन सेल में केस भी कर रखा था और शशि कुमार इसकी तारीखें भुगत रहा था।
आशा रानी ने बताया कि शशि के ससुराल वाले भी उसको पिछले काफी समय से परेशान कर रहे थे। इसी परेशानी के चलते उसने गत दिनों नहर में कूदकर आत्महत्या कर ली। फरीदकोट पुलिस ने आशा रानी के बयानों पर भारती, उसके पिता मदन लाल गाधी, निटकोन अधिकारी उसके भाई पि्रंस गाधी व ज्योति गाधी पर आत्महत्या के लिए मजबूर करने के मामले के तहत मुकदमा नंबर 181 दर्ज कर लिया है।

http://www.jagran.com/punjab/faridkot-10544453.html 

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 

पत्नी ने प्रेमी संग मिल रची थी हत्या की साजिश

पत्नी ने प्रेमी संग मिल रची थी हत्या की साजिश

रायबरेली, संवाददाता : मिल एरिया पुलिस ने शनिवार को असलम हत्याकांड का खुलासा कर दिया। हत्यारोपी पत्‍‌नी नसरीन, उसके प्रेमी रोहन समेत चार लोगों को जेल भेजा गया है। मामले में एक आरोपी अभी फरार चल रहा है। पुलिस अधीक्षक राजेश पांडेय ने मिल एरिया पुलिस को ढाई हजार रुपये का पुरस्कार देने की घोषणा की है।
एसपी ने वारदात का खुलासा करते हुए बताया कि दो मई को कल्लू का पुरवा निवासिनी नसरीन (18) पुत्री अजीज का निकाह हरदासपुर निवासी असलम (22) पुत्र मो. रसीद के साथ हुआ था। नसरीन का तकरीबन डेढ़ वर्ष से रोहन शर्मा पुत्र श्रवण कुमार निवासी कल्लू का पुरवा के साथ प्रेम प्रसंग चल रहा था। शादी के बाद भी नसरीन रोहन से बात करती थी, जो कि असलम को नागवार लगता था। असलम ने कई बार नसरीन को समझाया और पीटा भी, लेकिन बातचीत बंद नहीं हुई। नसरीन ने पिटाई की बात रोहन को बताई। रोहन और नसरीन ने मिलकर असलम की हत्या की साजिश रची।
22 जून को नसरीन ने फोन करके असलम को सहेली के घर चलने की बात कहकर बुलाया। वह असलम को लेकर त्रिपुला के पास पेट्रोल पंप के पीछे बने मकान में ले गई। यहां पहले से रोहन व उसके साथी अंशु शर्मा पुत्र पवन शर्मा निवासी कल्लू का पुरवा, अतुल कुमार दीक्षित पुत्र रमाकांत दीक्षित निवास लहुरिया कोड़रस बुजुर्ग और संजय मौजूद थे। असलम को कमरे के भीतर ले जाने के बाद नसरीन ने रोहन को बुलाया। रोहन को सामने देख असलम को गुस्सा आया और उसने दोनों की पिटाई कर दी। तभी अंशू, संजय और अतुल आ गए। रोहन ने नसरीन को दूसरे कमरे में भेज दिए। फिर चारों दोस्तों ने मिल कर आटो के एक्सीलेटर वायर से असलम का गला कस दिया। असलम बार-बार जान बख्शने की गुहार लगा रहा था लेकिन रोहन बेरहम हो गया और उसको मौत के घाट उतारने के बाद ही रुका। बाद में नसरीन को बाइक से उसके घर भेज दिया गया। रोहन, संजय और अतुल ने असलम के शव को आटो की डिग्गी में डाला और फतेहपुर के हुसैनगंज में नहर में फेंक दिया। 23 जून को उसका शव व एक्सीलेटर वायर हुसैनगंज पुलिस ने बरामद किया।
सीओ सदर पंकज पांडेय और मिल एरिया एसओ मनोज मिश्र ने मामले की तहकीकात शुरू की। नसरीन को हिरासत में लेते ही पूरा मामला सामने आ गया। बाद में रोहन, अतुल और संजय को पुलिस ने गिरफ्तार कर लिया। असलम हत्याकांड में गिरफ्तारी सभी आरोपियों की उम्र 18 से 24 वर्ष के मध्य है।
गलती हो गई..
पति की हत्यारोपी नसरीन पुलिस आफिस में रो पड़ी। बोली, गलती हो गई। मुझे नहीं पता था कि इतनी बड़ी गलती करने जा रही हूं। भावावेश में आकर गलत कदम उठ गए। इसके लिए मैं कभी खुद को माफ नहीं कर पाऊंगी।

http://www.jagran.com/uttar-pradesh/raebareli-10520744.html

India’s 498a Law – The Abuse Continues

 India’s 498a Law – The Abuse Continues 

In a landmark decision in 2010, Preeti Gupta v. State of Jharkhand, the Supreme Court of India lambasted the prevalent abuse of the infamous Section 498a of the Indian Penal Code law demanded that the legislature should change the law and directed that a copy of its decision be sent to the Law Commission of Indian the hope that the legislation might be amended.

The Law Commission issued a report in August 2012, calling for quite modest changes in the law. However, even those changes have not yet been enacted.

In Gupta the Supreme Court demanded that lower courts intervene to prevent the rampant consequential abuse of process, which has “led to enormous social unrest affecting peace, harmony and happiness of the society”; ruled that “most” 498a cases are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations; asserted that many such cases are not bona fide, that many are filed with an oblique motive, and that many are filled with exaggerated or false claims; explained that these cases “can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the accused and to his close relations” and “immense sufferings for all concerned;” and stated further that an ultimate acquittal may “not be able to wipe out the deep scars of suffering of ignominy.”

Meanwhile the abusive conduct continues. The Law Commission reported that in 2010 there were at least 340,555 cases under Section 498-A that were pending trial in various courts towards the end of 2010 and that there were as many as 938,809 people who were implicated in these cases. The reason that there were almost three times as many people accused as there were cases is that the law expressly authorizes a wife (but not a husband) to ask the police to bring charges against all of the relatives of her husband who may have participated in the alleged acts of cruelty.

We have commented previously on this law, that was well-intentioned in its enactment but which is frequently misused in India as a means of blackmailing non-resident Indian husbands. http://www.international-divorce.com/Indias-Notorious-Section-498A.htm.

http://www.internationalfamilylawfirm.com/2013/06/indias-498a-law-abuse-continues.html 

Lump sum payment received from Ex-husband against relinquishment of monthly maintenance not taxable: Tribunal

Lump sum payment received from Ex-husband against relinquishment of monthly maintenance not taxable: Tribunal

MUMBAI: Marriages are made in heaven, but a divorce happens on earth and with it comes the inevitable question of alimony and its tax implications. In a recent decision the Delhi Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has held that a lump sum payment received from a former husband, against relinquishment of monthly maintenance is a capital receipt and is not taxable.

The case relates to a Delhi-based woman, who had received a lump sum of $99,000 from her ex-husband based in the United States, but had not shown the amount in her tax declaration. Based on current exchange rate this sum translates to approximately Rs. 60 lakh.

Under Indian tax laws, any sum of money received by an individual without any consideration (without getting anything in return), in excess of Rs 50,000 in a year, is taxable. But if the same is received from a relative, such as a spouse, or on certain occasions such as marriage, it is exempt.

The tax officer, in this case, had held that as the divorce had taken place several years ago, the Delhi-based resident was not a 'relative' and hence such payment was not exempt but taxable as 'income from other sources' in her hands. This approach adopted by the tax officer, was rejected at the first level of appeal - commissioner of income-tax (appeals).

The commissioner held that the amount was paid by way of alimony only because they were husband and wife. Thus the payment received was from a relative (which includes spouse).

Further it cannot be said that the lump sum amount was received without any consideration. It was received against relinquishment by the wife of her right to receive monthly alimony payments (both past arrears and future payments). Such monthly payments were provided for in the divorce agreement.

Hearing an appeal filed by the tax officer, the Delhi ITAT upheld the order of the CIT (appeals). It observed that: "In this case, the taxpayer was to receive monthly alimony which was to be taxable in each year. As such monthly payments were not received they were not offered for tax as income. The lump sum received by the woman was a consideration for relinquishing all past and future claims." It was a non-taxable capital receipt not liable to tax, concluded the ITAT.

"Tax on alimony payment cannot be avoided by merely taking a lump sum consideration. Various facts such as the period of time the monthly alimony was not received, action taken for receipt of such alimony, and the fact pattern of the final settlement by way of lump sum payment will determine whether it will be treated as non-taxable," cautions a civil advocate, attached to the Mumbai high court.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Lump-sum-payment-received-from-Ex-husband-against-relinquishment-of-monthly-maintenance-not-taxable-Tribunal/articleshow/20823480.cms?

Govt wants judges fined for frequent adjournments

Govt wants judges fined for frequent adjournments

NEW DELHI: The government has suggested that higher judiciary impose fines on judges for allowing frequent and too many adjournments, a move which can potentially ensure swift punishment for those guilty of heinous crimes, early release of undertrials who may be found innocent as well as respite for those who have been embroiled in interminably long litigation over civil disputes.

The government has been holding consultations with the Supreme Court to urge the latter to ensure that the amendment made under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which capped the adjournments permissible in a case at three, are implemented. It suggested that the higher judiciary consider imposing fines on judges infringing the three adjournment ceiling.

In fact, in cases of heinous crimes like rape, the amended Section 309 of CrPC lays down a timeframe of two months for the completion of inquiry as well as trial.

Sources said the law ministry has held several rounds of consultations with the apex court, and expressed satisfaction with the response it received to the proposal for strict enforcement of Section 309 of CrPC, limiting the number of adjournments before the subordinate judiciary.

The apex court too has in a number of recent judgments frowned upon the trend among subordinate judiciary to allow frequent adjournments: something which has been identified as one of the main factors behind the huge pendency of cases. The government is hopeful that SC may take steps shortly to ensure that the guidelines under the amended Section 309 are no longer disregarded by judges.

Section 309 of CrPC provides that "every inquiry or trial shall be held as expeditiously as possible and the recording of examination of witnesses shall be continued on day-to-day basis unless the court finds the adjournment of the same beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to be recorded".

The government later incorporated some more guidelines relating to adjournments which specified that "no adjournment shall be granted at the request of a party, except where the circumstances are beyond the control of that party and even in cases where the pleader of a party is engaged in another court, shall not be a ground for adjournment".

The other important guideline said if a "witness is present in court but a party or his pleader is not present or the party or his pleader though present in court is not ready to examine or cross-examine the witness, the court may, if it thinks fit, record the statement of the witness and pass such orders as it thinks fit". Sources said some of these guidelines may be notified soon so that it becomes compulsory for the subordinate judiciary to enforce them.

Already, the law ministry has drawn up a list of other important amendments carried out in CrPC in the recent past but which are not being enforced by the lower judiciary.

For instance, a new Section 436A has been inserted, which provides that "if an accused has spent half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for that offence, not being an offence for which the death punishment has been specified as one of the punishment, he shall be released by the court on his personal bond with or without sureties".

Another amendment in Section 437 of CrPC provides that "if the accused had been previously convicted on two or more occasions of a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment for three years or more but not less than seven years, such person shall not be granted bail". http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Govt-wants-judges-fined-for-frequent-adjournments/articleshow/20825760.cms 

Husband, 4 family members acquitted in dowry harassment case

Husband, 4 family members acquitted in dowry harassment case

A man and his parents have been acquitted of the charges of murdering and harassing his wife for bringing insufficient dowry by a Delhi court which said it was a case of suicide and false allegations of torture were levelled against them.

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) K S Pal also acquitted the man's brother and his wife of the charges of subjecting the woman to cruelty.

While freeing the five family members of Ganesh Nagar here, the court observed that now-a-days, there is a growing tendency adopted by the parents of deceased married woman, who died in her matrimonial house within seven years of marriage due to any reason, to implicate the husband and his relatives by making false allegations of harassment on ground of dowry demands due to their anger and to take revenge.

The court acquitted deceased Vinita's husband Lalit Kumar, his father Soran Singh, mother Ram Murti of the charges of murder, harassment for dowry and destruction of evidence. Lalit's brother Devender and his wife Urmila were acquitted of the charge of harassment.

"Undoubtedly, deceased Vinita committed suicide and there may be so many reasons to commit suicide and every suicide committed by any married woman at her matrimonial home, within seven years of her marriage, does not raise the presumption of dowry death in the absence of any harassment and torture on such married woman for or in connection with dowry demands, soon before her death," the judge said.

According to the police, Vinita was found hanging at her matrimonial house on April 11, 2011 and a case was lodged against her husband and in-laws for harassing and murdering her.

The victim's parents had told the police that Vinita had got married to Lalit in July 2009 and after 15 days of their marriage, the accused had started harassing and torturing her for dowry and were demanding a car.

http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/husband-4-family-members-acquitted-in-dowry-harassment-case-113062800680_1.html