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 

SC strikes gender equality note in grant of divorce

SC strikes gender equality note in grant of divorce

NEW DELHI: Irretrievable breakdown of marriage, coupled with promise of large amount of money as permanent alimony, has been cited by rich and powerful men to seek divorce from their wives when all was not well in the marital relationship.

Striking a gender equality note, the Supreme Court on Monday turned the tables and asked whether it would have granted divorce to a woman from her husband, who on developing some mental disorder had become completely dependent on her, if she promised a huge sum as permanent alimony.

The case related to Darshan Gupta and Radhika Gupta, who married when they were barely out of their teens in 1997. Radhika's first pregnancy was terminated due to medical reasons. The second pregnancy was again a very complicated one and the child had to be delivered through Caesarian section. She remained unconscious for a long time and developed serious mental disorder. The child died eight days after birth.

Though she was treated in reputed hospitals, she allegedly remained mentally ill. The husband claimed separation from her since 2002, breakdown of marriage and offered a large sum of money as permanent alimony to seek termination of marriage.

A bench of Justices P Sathasivam and J S Khehar rejected the husband's plea and wondered whether a similar request by a woman would have been entertained by the apex court for grant of divorce from a husband who developed some mental disorder.

"In the context of doing justice, it was suggested that the appellant (husband) would be ready and willing to pay the respondent (wife) whatever was considered appropriate by the Supreme Court. We are informed that the appellant is financially well to do," the bench said.

"We would, in our endeavour to determine the issue in hand, examine the matter by reversing the 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," the bench added.

"And the wife's family is agreeable to pay an amount to be determined by this court (just as the husband Darshan Gupta has offered), 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, in the facts denoted above," it further said.

"In such a 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," Justice Khehar, while authoring the judgment for the bench, said. 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-strikes-gender-equality-note-in-grant-of-divorce/articleshow/20868692.cms