Friday, 19 July 2013
Eight booked for senior citizen's suicide
Eight booked for senior citizen's suicide
NAGPUR: Kalamna police have booked daughter-in-law SheetalMalviya, her parents and five others of her family for allegedly abetting the suicide of 67-year-old GajendraMalviya, who died after consuming poison on June 1, 2013.
Before Malviya's suicide, Sheetal had accused him of outraging her modesty. He had been booked for molestation by Kalamna police on May 2 and had been released on interim bail when he consumed poison at his Dipti Signal residence.
Malviya had blamed Sheetal and her family for his suicide. Malviya had written in his suicide note that Sheetal and her family would harass him to give money, otherwise they threatened to implicate his son in harassment charges.
Besides Sheetal, five people from the Kadhi family (Bhavana, Amit, Chandrakant, Kishore and Jaswant) and two others (Vijay and Harshal Kukriya) were booked by the cops.
Before Malviya's suicide, Sheetal had accused him of outraging her modesty. He had been booked for molestation by Kalamna police on May 2 and had been released on interim bail when he consumed poison at his Dipti Signal residence.
Malviya had blamed Sheetal and her family for his suicide. Malviya had written in his suicide note that Sheetal and her family would harass him to give money, otherwise they threatened to implicate his son in harassment charges.
Besides Sheetal, five people from the Kadhi family (Bhavana, Amit, Chandrakant, Kishore and Jaswant) and two others (Vijay and Harshal Kukriya) were booked by the cops.
New bill gives woman share in ex-husband’s inherited property
New bill gives woman share in ex-husband’s inherited property
NEW
DELHI: A wife will have a share in her husband's inherited or
inheritable marital property on divorce, though the exact quantum of the
compensation has been left to the discretion of the judge, according to
a legislation that was cleared by the Union Cabinet on Wednesday.
The Cabinet also cleared the proposal that in cases where divorce has been sought on mutual consent of both parties the judiciary has been given the discretion to grant divorce to one party after a period of three years, even if the man and the wife are no longer on the same page. These were part of the recommendations of the GoM on Marriage Laws Amendment Bill which will now be amended suitably before being brought to Parliament during the monsoon session, beginning August 5.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-17/india/40634500_1_mutual-consent-marital-property-divorce-case
The Cabinet also cleared the proposal that in cases where divorce has been sought on mutual consent of both parties the judiciary has been given the discretion to grant divorce to one party after a period of three years, even if the man and the wife are no longer on the same page. These were part of the recommendations of the GoM on Marriage Laws Amendment Bill which will now be amended suitably before being brought to Parliament during the monsoon session, beginning August 5.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-07-17/india/40634500_1_mutual-consent-marital-property-divorce-case
Daughter-in-law withdraws dowry case against Shankar Rao
Daughter-in-law withdraws dowry case against Shankar Rao
Hyderabad:
Vamsi Priya, daughter-in-law of former minister Dr P. Shankar Rao, on
Wednesday withdrew the dowry harassment cases that she filed against her
husband and in-laws.
Vamsi Priya also filed a petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court stating that she was withdrawing the cases.
It may be mentioned that the Cantonment MLA was arrested by the Central Crime Station officials of City Police in connection with the same dowry harassment case filed against him. Later, he was shifted to a hospital after he fell ill where he is still undergoing treatment.
Vamsi Priya also filed a petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court stating that she was withdrawing the cases.
It may be mentioned that the Cantonment MLA was arrested by the Central Crime Station officials of City Police in connection with the same dowry harassment case filed against him. Later, he was shifted to a hospital after he fell ill where he is still undergoing treatment.
Husband arrested for sexually starving wife for dowry
Husband arrested for sexually starving wife for dowry
The all women police here have arrested a man for sexually starving (refusing to cohabit) his wife even a year after their marriage, demanding that she first fulfill his demand for dowry.
Priya (22) who was unable to bear the mental agony of her husband Ramesh (23) for more than 16 months finally approached the police.
Police said she got married in March last year and her nightmare began the same day as her husband demanded immediate handing over of seven sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs five lakh cash, saying he would not have any physical contact with her till such time.
Her parents had agreed to give 20 sovereigns of gold to Ramesh, who works in a goldsmith outlet, but could give only 13 sovereigns on day of the marriage, they said.
Based on the complaint, Ramesh was arrested and a hunt is on for his parents who were part of the torture, police said.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/husband-arrested-for-sexually-starving-wife-for-dowry/1143641/
The all women police here have arrested a man for sexually starving (refusing to cohabit) his wife even a year after their marriage, demanding that she first fulfill his demand for dowry.
Priya (22) who was unable to bear the mental agony of her husband Ramesh (23) for more than 16 months finally approached the police.
Police said she got married in March last year and her nightmare began the same day as her husband demanded immediate handing over of seven sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs five lakh cash, saying he would not have any physical contact with her till such time.
Her parents had agreed to give 20 sovereigns of gold to Ramesh, who works in a goldsmith outlet, but could give only 13 sovereigns on day of the marriage, they said.
Based on the complaint, Ramesh was arrested and a hunt is on for his parents who were part of the torture, police said.
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/husband-arrested-for-sexually-starving-wife-for-dowry/1143641/
नए विवाह क़ानून से होंगी राहें आसान?
नए विवाह क़ानून से होंगी राहें आसान?
विवाह क़ानून (संशोधन) विधेयक पर क्लिक करें मंत्रियों के समूह (जीओएम) की सिफारिशों को क्लिक करें कैबिनेट की मंज़ूरी मिल गई है, जिसमें तलाक होने पर पति की पैतृक संपत्ति में महिला को पर्याप्त मुआवजे का प्रावधान शामिल है.
हालांकि इन सिफारिशों को अभी संसद की मंज़ूरी नहीं मिली है, लेकिन इसके नफ़ा-नुकसान को लेकर महिलावादी संगठनों और पुरुषवादी संगठनों के बीच तकरार शुरू हो गई है.
महिलावादी संगठनों के मुताबिक एक
अच्छा विधेयक है लेकिन महिलाओं को उनका हक़ दिलाने के लिए इस क़ानून की
भाषा में और स्पष्टता की ज़रुरत है.
दूसरी ओर पुरूषों के संगठन की दलील है कि “अगर लड़की के घर वाले उसे अपनी संपत्ति में हिस्सा नहीं देते हैं, तो इसके लिए हम उस पति को क्यों सज़ा दे. शादी करना क्या एक आदमी के लिए जुर्म है.”
लेकिन इस बहस से पहले आइए इस विधेयक के मुख्य प्रावधानों को समझ लें, उसके बाद हम पक्ष और विपक्ष की दलीलों को सामने रखेंगे.
क्लिक करें
विवाह क़ानून (संशोधन) विधेयक में प्रावधान है कि पति को मिली पैतृक संपत्ति या उसके द्वारा खुद अर्जित संपत्ति में पत्नी की हिस्सेदारी होगी.
कैबिनेट ने इस बात को भी मंज़ूरी दी है कि अगर आपसी सहमति से क्लिक करें तलाक के लिए पति या पत्नी में से कोई एक पक्ष दोबारा संयुक्त आवेदन दायर नहीं करता है तो अदालत तीन साल के बाद तलाक देने के लिए अपने विवेकाधिकार का इस्तेमाल कर सकती है.
मंत्री समूह की सिफारिशों को स्वीकार करते हुए कैबिनेट ने फैसला किया है कि तलाक की स्थिति में पत्नी और बच्चों को पति की अचल संपत्ति में हिस्सा मिलेगा.
पर यह हिस्सा कितना होगा, इसका फैसला अदालत पर छोड़ा गया है.
पति की पैतृक संपत्ति से भी पत्नी और बच्चों को हर्जाना दिया जाएगा. इसके लिए एक नई धारा 13 (एफ) को जोड़ा गया है.
सरकार 2010 में इस विधेयक को राज्य सभा में पेश करने के साथ ही इस पर सहमति बनाने के लिए जूझ रही है.
यह चौथी बार है जब कैबिनेट ने इस विधेयक को पारित किया है.
इसके पहले इस साल अप्रैल में कुछ प्रावधानों पर कैबिनेट में गहरे मतभेद उभरे थे.
इसके बाद आम सहमति बनाने के मकसद से प्रधानमंत्री मनमोहन सिंह ने रक्षा मंत्री एके एंटनी की अगुआई में मंत्री समूह यानी जीओएम का गठन किया था.
आल इंडिया प्रोग्रेसिव वुमन्स एसोसिएशन (एआईपीडब्ल्यूए) की सचिव कविता कृष्णन ने बीबीसी संवाददाता रूपा झा को बताया कि यह एक अच्छा विधेयक है लेकिन महिला को उसका हक़ दिलाने के लिए इस क़ानून की भाषा में और स्पष्टता की ज़रुरत है.
उन्होंने कहा कि “इस विधेयक में यह देखना होगा कि किन परिस्थितियों में कौन सी प्रॉपर्टी को बंटवारे के लायक माना जाएगा. यदि इसमें स्पष्टता होगी तभी महिलाओं को तलाक के समय कुछ मिल पाएगा.”
उनका कहना था कि इसको लेकर जो हौव्वा बनाया जा रहा है कि महिलाएं पुरुष की प्रापर्टी को चुरा रही हैं, असल सवाल यह है ही नहीं. असल सवाल तो यह है कि सरकार इसी विधेयक में तलाक को ज्यादा आसान बनाने के लिए कदम उठा रही है. यानी अगर कोई चाहे तो एकतरफा तलाक भी मिल सकता है.”
कविता कृष्णन अपनी बात को बढ़ाते हुए कहतीं हैं कि “अपने देश में ज्यादातर महिलाएँ पुरूषों पर आश्रित होती हैं, ऐसे में अगर पुरुष तलाक ले लेता है तो महिला के पास कुछ नहीं बचता है. इस संदर्भ में हर्जाने पर चर्चा की जा रही है.”
उन्होंने कहा कि इस विधेयक में यह प्रावधान भी किया गया है संपत्ति में हिस्सा जज के विवेकाधिकार से तय होगा. इसलिए ऐसा नहीं है कि महिलाओं को एकतरफा अधिकार दिए जा रहे हैं.
उन्होंने बताया, “पति और पत्नी दोनों की स्थिति को देखते हुए महिला को केवल उसकी ज़रूरत का हिस्सा मिलेगा.”
दूसरी ओर पुरुष अधिकारों के लिए काम करने वाली संस्था कॉन्फिडेयर के विराग धूलिया इस विधेयक को सरासर गलत बताते हैं.
उनके मुताबिक “इस क़ानून में सरकार खुलकर कुछ बता नहीं रही है कि किस तरह के प्रावधान है, कैसे उन्हें लागू किया जाएगा, प्रॉपर्टी का कैसे बंटवारा किया जाएगा.
वह कहते हैं, "लड़की के घर वाले उसे अपनी प्रॉपर्टी में हिस्सा नहीं देते हैं तो इसके लिए हम पति को क्यों सज़ा दे. शादी करना क्या एक आदमी के लिए जुर्म है.”
उन्होंने कहा कि शादी एक महीने की है या 20 साल की, इसमें कोई अंतर नहीं किया गया है. आप शादी करो और एक महीने में आधी प्रापर्टी लेकर चले जाओ.
वह बताते हैं कि “इससे ग़रीब औरत को कोई फ़ायदा नहीं होगा क्योंकि ग़रीब औरत का पति भी तो ग़रीब ही होगा, तो क्या वो अपना आधा ऑटो रिक्शा बाँटेगा?”
विरार धूलिया के मुताबिक विधेयक में इस बात का कोई ज़िक्र नहीं किया गया है कि पत्नी के पास जो संपत्ति है उसका क्या होगा.
वह यह दलील भी देते हैं कि जिस भी देश में प्रापर्टी में हिस्सेदारी का क़ानून आया है वहाँ शादी की दर कम हो गई है. लोगों ने शादी करनी बंद कर दी है. ऐसे में भारत के सामाजिक ताने-बाने पर इस क़ानून का बुरा असर होगा.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/hindi/india/2013/07/130719_marriage_law_ap.shtml
विवाह क़ानून (संशोधन) विधेयक पर क्लिक करें मंत्रियों के समूह (जीओएम) की सिफारिशों को क्लिक करें कैबिनेट की मंज़ूरी मिल गई है, जिसमें तलाक होने पर पति की पैतृक संपत्ति में महिला को पर्याप्त मुआवजे का प्रावधान शामिल है.
हालांकि इन सिफारिशों को अभी संसद की मंज़ूरी नहीं मिली है, लेकिन इसके नफ़ा-नुकसान को लेकर महिलावादी संगठनों और पुरुषवादी संगठनों के बीच तकरार शुरू हो गई है.
दूसरी ओर पुरूषों के संगठन की दलील है कि “अगर लड़की के घर वाले उसे अपनी संपत्ति में हिस्सा नहीं देते हैं, तो इसके लिए हम उस पति को क्यों सज़ा दे. शादी करना क्या एक आदमी के लिए जुर्म है.”
लेकिन इस बहस से पहले आइए इस विधेयक के मुख्य प्रावधानों को समझ लें, उसके बाद हम पक्ष और विपक्ष की दलीलों को सामने रखेंगे.
पैतृक संपत्ति में हिस्सेदारी
इस कानून को महिला सशक्तिकरण की दिशा में अहम कदम माना जा रहा है.
कैबिनेट ने इस बात को भी मंज़ूरी दी है कि अगर आपसी सहमति से क्लिक करें तलाक के लिए पति या पत्नी में से कोई एक पक्ष दोबारा संयुक्त आवेदन दायर नहीं करता है तो अदालत तीन साल के बाद तलाक देने के लिए अपने विवेकाधिकार का इस्तेमाल कर सकती है.
मंत्री समूह की सिफारिशों को स्वीकार करते हुए कैबिनेट ने फैसला किया है कि तलाक की स्थिति में पत्नी और बच्चों को पति की अचल संपत्ति में हिस्सा मिलेगा.
पर यह हिस्सा कितना होगा, इसका फैसला अदालत पर छोड़ा गया है.
पति की पैतृक संपत्ति से भी पत्नी और बच्चों को हर्जाना दिया जाएगा. इसके लिए एक नई धारा 13 (एफ) को जोड़ा गया है.
राह नहीं आसान
कैबिनेट की मंजूरी मिल जाने के बावजूद इस विधेयक की राह आसान नहीं है.सरकार 2010 में इस विधेयक को राज्य सभा में पेश करने के साथ ही इस पर सहमति बनाने के लिए जूझ रही है.
यह चौथी बार है जब कैबिनेट ने इस विधेयक को पारित किया है.
इसके पहले इस साल अप्रैल में कुछ प्रावधानों पर कैबिनेट में गहरे मतभेद उभरे थे.
इसके बाद आम सहमति बनाने के मकसद से प्रधानमंत्री मनमोहन सिंह ने रक्षा मंत्री एके एंटनी की अगुआई में मंत्री समूह यानी जीओएम का गठन किया था.
पक्ष की दलील
तलाक की स्थिति में अक्सर महिलाओं को बेहद मुश्किल हालात का सामना करना पड़ता है.
उन्होंने कहा कि “इस विधेयक में यह देखना होगा कि किन परिस्थितियों में कौन सी प्रॉपर्टी को बंटवारे के लायक माना जाएगा. यदि इसमें स्पष्टता होगी तभी महिलाओं को तलाक के समय कुछ मिल पाएगा.”
उनका कहना था कि इसको लेकर जो हौव्वा बनाया जा रहा है कि महिलाएं पुरुष की प्रापर्टी को चुरा रही हैं, असल सवाल यह है ही नहीं. असल सवाल तो यह है कि सरकार इसी विधेयक में तलाक को ज्यादा आसान बनाने के लिए कदम उठा रही है. यानी अगर कोई चाहे तो एकतरफा तलाक भी मिल सकता है.”
कविता कृष्णन अपनी बात को बढ़ाते हुए कहतीं हैं कि “अपने देश में ज्यादातर महिलाएँ पुरूषों पर आश्रित होती हैं, ऐसे में अगर पुरुष तलाक ले लेता है तो महिला के पास कुछ नहीं बचता है. इस संदर्भ में हर्जाने पर चर्चा की जा रही है.”
उन्होंने कहा कि इस विधेयक में यह प्रावधान भी किया गया है संपत्ति में हिस्सा जज के विवेकाधिकार से तय होगा. इसलिए ऐसा नहीं है कि महिलाओं को एकतरफा अधिकार दिए जा रहे हैं.
उन्होंने बताया, “पति और पत्नी दोनों की स्थिति को देखते हुए महिला को केवल उसकी ज़रूरत का हिस्सा मिलेगा.”
विपक्ष की दलील
विपक्ष की दलील है कि इस विधेयक को लागू करने के बाद लोग शादी ही नहीं करेंगे.
उनके मुताबिक “इस क़ानून में सरकार खुलकर कुछ बता नहीं रही है कि किस तरह के प्रावधान है, कैसे उन्हें लागू किया जाएगा, प्रॉपर्टी का कैसे बंटवारा किया जाएगा.
वह कहते हैं, "लड़की के घर वाले उसे अपनी प्रॉपर्टी में हिस्सा नहीं देते हैं तो इसके लिए हम पति को क्यों सज़ा दे. शादी करना क्या एक आदमी के लिए जुर्म है.”
उन्होंने कहा कि शादी एक महीने की है या 20 साल की, इसमें कोई अंतर नहीं किया गया है. आप शादी करो और एक महीने में आधी प्रापर्टी लेकर चले जाओ.
वह बताते हैं कि “इससे ग़रीब औरत को कोई फ़ायदा नहीं होगा क्योंकि ग़रीब औरत का पति भी तो ग़रीब ही होगा, तो क्या वो अपना आधा ऑटो रिक्शा बाँटेगा?”
विरार धूलिया के मुताबिक विधेयक में इस बात का कोई ज़िक्र नहीं किया गया है कि पत्नी के पास जो संपत्ति है उसका क्या होगा.
वह यह दलील भी देते हैं कि जिस भी देश में प्रापर्टी में हिस्सेदारी का क़ानून आया है वहाँ शादी की दर कम हो गई है. लोगों ने शादी करनी बंद कर दी है. ऐसे में भारत के सामाजिक ताने-बाने पर इस क़ानून का बुरा असर होगा.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/hindi/india/2013/07/130719_marriage_law_ap.shtml
Study finds divorced women’s trauma in securing alimony
Study finds divorced women’s trauma in securing alimony
NEW DELHI: While the Cabinet's decision on Wednesday may appear tipped in favour of women, a recent study shows that seeking maintenance through courts is fraught with delays and requires deep pockets. The countrywide study shows that in nearly 50% cases women did not seek maintenance from their husbands either because they lacked resources (41.5% women had no income after separation while 27% earned less than Rs 2,000 per month) or were unaware.
The government has set the ball rolling for bringing in an amendment to the marriage legislation that will give a woman right to the inherited or inheritable marital property. The compensation amount will be decided by the courts. Divorced or separated women in India have to depend on maintenance since there are no laws for sharing of marital property. The proposed law seeks to correct that but activists feel it does this only half-heartedly.
A survey — based on 405 divorced and separated women across the country — says that getting justice from courts has always been a gamble for women. The survey is part of the book "Separated and Divorced Women in India: Economic Rights and Entitlements in India'' authored by senior lawyer and AIDWA legal convener Kirti Singh. Women's rights activists have been consistently demanding a comprehensive legislation that would provide a women equitable share to marital property.
The survey found that vast majority (almost 60%) were living in marital homes acquired by in-laws and a large number (71%) were forced to live with their families post separation. After the separation 41.5% had no income and 27.4% earned less than Rs 2,000 per month. Although 58.5% surveyed were able to work outside their home, their earnings were too low for them to survive independently.
"In India there is absence of laws for division of marital property, when a separation or divorce takes place, the male spouse usually walks away with all moveable and immoveable assets of the household. The government's decision is just throwing women at the court's discretion and we have found that courts have been conservative in their decisions,'' Singh said.
Of the total, 47.4% (almost half) did not ask for maintenance after divorce. The reasons range from not knowing that they are entitled to ask for maintenance, to not having money to approach the courts or wishing not to be dependent on the spouse. As many as 48.8% of these maintenance cases are pending; in 41.8% of the case smaintenace had been allowed and in 9.4% of the cases their applications were dismissed. In 89 cases where maintenance was allowed, only 12 women reported receiving a satisfactory amount.
Of the 60 women who answered the question on the quantum of maintenance awarded to them, those with no income at all received merely 13% of the salary on an average for financial support. So not only were women given short shrift, they were also forced to wait for a long time before they received the paltry amount. Only in 35.6% of the cases filed in court, was maintenance granted within a year. The rest took anywhere between one and five years.http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Study-finds-divorced-womens-trauma-in-securing-alimony/articleshow/21155954.cms
NEW DELHI: While the Cabinet's decision on Wednesday may appear tipped in favour of women, a recent study shows that seeking maintenance through courts is fraught with delays and requires deep pockets. The countrywide study shows that in nearly 50% cases women did not seek maintenance from their husbands either because they lacked resources (41.5% women had no income after separation while 27% earned less than Rs 2,000 per month) or were unaware.
The government has set the ball rolling for bringing in an amendment to the marriage legislation that will give a woman right to the inherited or inheritable marital property. The compensation amount will be decided by the courts. Divorced or separated women in India have to depend on maintenance since there are no laws for sharing of marital property. The proposed law seeks to correct that but activists feel it does this only half-heartedly.
A survey — based on 405 divorced and separated women across the country — says that getting justice from courts has always been a gamble for women. The survey is part of the book "Separated and Divorced Women in India: Economic Rights and Entitlements in India'' authored by senior lawyer and AIDWA legal convener Kirti Singh. Women's rights activists have been consistently demanding a comprehensive legislation that would provide a women equitable share to marital property.
The survey found that vast majority (almost 60%) were living in marital homes acquired by in-laws and a large number (71%) were forced to live with their families post separation. After the separation 41.5% had no income and 27.4% earned less than Rs 2,000 per month. Although 58.5% surveyed were able to work outside their home, their earnings were too low for them to survive independently.
"In India there is absence of laws for division of marital property, when a separation or divorce takes place, the male spouse usually walks away with all moveable and immoveable assets of the household. The government's decision is just throwing women at the court's discretion and we have found that courts have been conservative in their decisions,'' Singh said.
Of the total, 47.4% (almost half) did not ask for maintenance after divorce. The reasons range from not knowing that they are entitled to ask for maintenance, to not having money to approach the courts or wishing not to be dependent on the spouse. As many as 48.8% of these maintenance cases are pending; in 41.8% of the case smaintenace had been allowed and in 9.4% of the cases their applications were dismissed. In 89 cases where maintenance was allowed, only 12 women reported receiving a satisfactory amount.
Of the 60 women who answered the question on the quantum of maintenance awarded to them, those with no income at all received merely 13% of the salary on an average for financial support. So not only were women given short shrift, they were also forced to wait for a long time before they received the paltry amount. Only in 35.6% of the cases filed in court, was maintenance granted within a year. The rest took anywhere between one and five years.http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Study-finds-divorced-womens-trauma-in-securing-alimony/articleshow/21155954.cms
Wednesday, 17 July 2013
Government likely to discuss GoM's recommendations on marriage laws
Government likely to discuss GoM's recommendations on marriage laws
The government is likely to consider on Wednesday the recommendations of a Group of Ministers (GoM) to make marriage laws more women friendly. One of the key issues the GoM was asked to decide was whether a court can work out "sufficient compensation" for a woman from her husband's ancestral property in case of divorce which takes place on the grounds of "irretrievable breakdown of marriage".
The GoM, set up recently to decide on the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, was also asked to decide on whether a judge can exercise discretion in granting divorce if one of the partners does not move a second 'joint application' for divorce with mutual consent. But there is a view contrary to the proposal within the government. Sources said there is a view that by allowing courts the discretion to allow divorce would fail the very purpose of seeking it on the grounds of mutual consent.
They said if one of the parties refuses to move a joint application, then the other should be allowed to file for a divorce on other grounds than mutual consent. While the bill has a provision for share in a husband's self-acquired property, a new clause - 13 f - was discussed by the GoM headed by Defence Minister AK Antony. It says if the ancestral property cannot be divided, then the woman should get sufficient compensation by calculating husband's share in it. The amount of the compensation can be worked out by the court hearing the divorce case.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/government-likely-to-discuss-goms-recommendations-on-marriage-laws/407171-3.html
The government is likely to consider on Wednesday the recommendations of a Group of Ministers (GoM) to make marriage laws more women friendly. One of the key issues the GoM was asked to decide was whether a court can work out "sufficient compensation" for a woman from her husband's ancestral property in case of divorce which takes place on the grounds of "irretrievable breakdown of marriage".
The GoM, set up recently to decide on the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, was also asked to decide on whether a judge can exercise discretion in granting divorce if one of the partners does not move a second 'joint application' for divorce with mutual consent. But there is a view contrary to the proposal within the government. Sources said there is a view that by allowing courts the discretion to allow divorce would fail the very purpose of seeking it on the grounds of mutual consent.
They said if one of the parties refuses to move a joint application, then the other should be allowed to file for a divorce on other grounds than mutual consent. While the bill has a provision for share in a husband's self-acquired property, a new clause - 13 f - was discussed by the GoM headed by Defence Minister AK Antony. It says if the ancestral property cannot be divided, then the woman should get sufficient compensation by calculating husband's share in it. The amount of the compensation can be worked out by the court hearing the divorce case.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/government-likely-to-discuss-goms-recommendations-on-marriage-laws/407171-3.html
Married or not, domestic violence act binding, says Kerala HC
Married or not, domestic violence act binding, says Kerala HC
Kochi: In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that a woman is entitled to get protection under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act even if she was in a live-in relationship. 'What was intended under Sect 2(a) of the Act was a relationship of the same nature as marriage and nothing more', Justice K Harilal said in his order on Tuesday while dismissing a petition filed by a man hailing from Cherthala in Alapuzha district against a complaint from his live-in partner seeking protection from domestic violence and compensation.
According to Justice Harilal, "The couple must have lived together akin to spouses. That alone is sufficient. The legislature intent of the Act itself is to give protection to the women who were living with the husband in the nature of a marriage without a legal marriage."
The petitioner's contention was that the complainant was not a wife as per Sect 2(f) of the act and there was no domestic relationship them.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/married-or-not-domestic-violence-act-binding-says-kerala-hc/407277-62-126.html
Kochi: In a significant ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that a woman is entitled to get protection under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act even if she was in a live-in relationship. 'What was intended under Sect 2(a) of the Act was a relationship of the same nature as marriage and nothing more', Justice K Harilal said in his order on Tuesday while dismissing a petition filed by a man hailing from Cherthala in Alapuzha district against a complaint from his live-in partner seeking protection from domestic violence and compensation.
According to Justice Harilal, "The couple must have lived together akin to spouses. That alone is sufficient. The legislature intent of the Act itself is to give protection to the women who were living with the husband in the nature of a marriage without a legal marriage."
The petitioner's contention was that the complainant was not a wife as per Sect 2(f) of the act and there was no domestic relationship them.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/married-or-not-domestic-violence-act-binding-says-kerala-hc/407277-62-126.html
मैरिज एक्ट में संशोधनः महिलाओं को मिलेगा पैतृक संपत्ति में हिस्सा और भी...
मैरिज एक्ट में संशोधनः महिलाओं को मिलेगा पैतृक संपत्ति में हिस्सा और भी...
हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट में संशोधन को लेकर आखिरकार कैबिनेट ने फैसला ले लिया. मैरिज एक्ट में जो संशोधन किए गए हैं, उनके मुताबिक पैतृक संपत्ति में अब महिलाओं को भी हक मिलेगा.
महिलाओं को पिता और पति की संपत्ति में भी हिस्सेदारी मिलेगी हालांकि कितना हिस्सा मिलेगा इसका फैसला कोर्ट करेगी. इस संशोधन के बाद तलाक लेना अब पहले से ज्यादा आसान हो जाएगा.
क्या है हिन्दू मैरिज एक्ट?
शादियों को कानूनी शर्त में बांधन के लिए हिंदू मैरेज एक्ट बना था. ये बात आजादी के 8 साल बाद 1955 की है. तब से लेकर इस एक्ट में तमाम संशोधन हुए. हमारी परंपरा में कहावत तो ये है कि शादियां स्वर्ग मे तय होती हैं. इसे निबाहने के लिए 7 फेरों के 7 वचन ही काफी हैं. लेकिन बदलते जमाने की ये सहजता कई पेचिदगियों से भर चुकी है. इन्हीं पेचिदगियों से बचने के लिए लिए संविधान में हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट का प्रवाधान किया गया था.
शादियों को टूटने से बचाने और इसे कानूनी शर्तों में बांधने के लिए 1955 में हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट बनाया गया. मगर टूटते बिखरते रिश्तों का आलम ये है, कि कोर्ट को भी एक्ट को लचीला बनाना पड़ा.
अगर किसी भी शादी को बचाने की कोई गुंजाइश नहीं बची हो, रिश्ता तोड़ने पर पति-पत्नी दोनों सहमत हों, तो 6 महीने की ‘कूलिंग पीरियड’ से पहले भी तलाक दिया जा सकता है. देश की ऊंची अदालत ने ये फैसला तो एक निजी मामले में दिया था. लेकिन ये फैसला इशारा करता है, रिश्तों की घुटन से मुक्ति पाने की छटपटाहट वक्त के साथ कितनी बढ़ती गई है. इसी के साथ हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट में संशोधनों भी किए जाते रहे हैं.
मसलन, मूल कानून में लड़कों के लिए शादी की उम्र 18 साल और लड़कियों की 15 साल थी, जिसे आगे चलकर 21 साल और 18 साल किया गया. पहले हिंदू रीति रिवाजों से हुई शादी को मान्य माना जाता था, आगे चलकर इसमें कानूनी पंजीकरण का प्रावधान किया गया. तलाक की शर्तों में भी बदलाव किया जाता रहा. तलाक के बाद बीवियों को मुआवजे का ख्याल रखा गया.
http://aajtak.intoday.in/story/cabinet-decision-on-marriage-act--1-736357.html
हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट में संशोधन को लेकर आखिरकार कैबिनेट ने फैसला ले लिया. मैरिज एक्ट में जो संशोधन किए गए हैं, उनके मुताबिक पैतृक संपत्ति में अब महिलाओं को भी हक मिलेगा.
महिलाओं को पिता और पति की संपत्ति में भी हिस्सेदारी मिलेगी हालांकि कितना हिस्सा मिलेगा इसका फैसला कोर्ट करेगी. इस संशोधन के बाद तलाक लेना अब पहले से ज्यादा आसान हो जाएगा.
क्या है हिन्दू मैरिज एक्ट?
शादियों को कानूनी शर्त में बांधन के लिए हिंदू मैरेज एक्ट बना था. ये बात आजादी के 8 साल बाद 1955 की है. तब से लेकर इस एक्ट में तमाम संशोधन हुए. हमारी परंपरा में कहावत तो ये है कि शादियां स्वर्ग मे तय होती हैं. इसे निबाहने के लिए 7 फेरों के 7 वचन ही काफी हैं. लेकिन बदलते जमाने की ये सहजता कई पेचिदगियों से भर चुकी है. इन्हीं पेचिदगियों से बचने के लिए लिए संविधान में हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट का प्रवाधान किया गया था.
शादियों को टूटने से बचाने और इसे कानूनी शर्तों में बांधने के लिए 1955 में हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट बनाया गया. मगर टूटते बिखरते रिश्तों का आलम ये है, कि कोर्ट को भी एक्ट को लचीला बनाना पड़ा.
अगर किसी भी शादी को बचाने की कोई गुंजाइश नहीं बची हो, रिश्ता तोड़ने पर पति-पत्नी दोनों सहमत हों, तो 6 महीने की ‘कूलिंग पीरियड’ से पहले भी तलाक दिया जा सकता है. देश की ऊंची अदालत ने ये फैसला तो एक निजी मामले में दिया था. लेकिन ये फैसला इशारा करता है, रिश्तों की घुटन से मुक्ति पाने की छटपटाहट वक्त के साथ कितनी बढ़ती गई है. इसी के साथ हिंदू मैरिज एक्ट में संशोधनों भी किए जाते रहे हैं.
मसलन, मूल कानून में लड़कों के लिए शादी की उम्र 18 साल और लड़कियों की 15 साल थी, जिसे आगे चलकर 21 साल और 18 साल किया गया. पहले हिंदू रीति रिवाजों से हुई शादी को मान्य माना जाता था, आगे चलकर इसमें कानूनी पंजीकरण का प्रावधान किया गया. तलाक की शर्तों में भी बदलाव किया जाता रहा. तलाक के बाद बीवियों को मुआवजे का ख्याल रखा गया.
http://aajtak.intoday.in/story/cabinet-decision-on-marriage-act--1-736357.html
Tuesday, 16 July 2013
Yukta Mookhey’s hubby gets interim court relief
Yukta Mookhey’s hubby gets interim court relief
MUMBAI: A sessions court on Monday granted interim relief till July 19 to former beauty queen Yukta Mookhey's estranged husband after she filed a case of cruelty against him and her in-laws.
Prince Tuli, represented by advocates Avinash Gupta and Filji Frederick, had filed the anticipatory bail application after Mookhey filed a case at Amboli police station under sections 498 A (cruelty), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 377 ( unnatural sex) on July 3.
Additional sessions judge D A Dholakia said in the event of his arrest, Prince should be released on the execution of a bond of Rs 25,000. He was also told not to tamper with the prosecution evidence, not to leave India without the court's permission and to be present before the investigating officer every day between 11am and 1pm. The prosecution was told to file its reply. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Yukta-Mookheys-hubby-gets-interim-court-relief/articleshow/21094168.cms
MUMBAI: A sessions court on Monday granted interim relief till July 19 to former beauty queen Yukta Mookhey's estranged husband after she filed a case of cruelty against him and her in-laws.
Prince Tuli, represented by advocates Avinash Gupta and Filji Frederick, had filed the anticipatory bail application after Mookhey filed a case at Amboli police station under sections 498 A (cruelty), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 377 ( unnatural sex) on July 3.
Additional sessions judge D A Dholakia said in the event of his arrest, Prince should be released on the execution of a bond of Rs 25,000. He was also told not to tamper with the prosecution evidence, not to leave India without the court's permission and to be present before the investigating officer every day between 11am and 1pm. The prosecution was told to file its reply. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Yukta-Mookheys-hubby-gets-interim-court-relief/articleshow/21094168.cms
Magistrates should apply mind before passing orders, says HC
Magistrates should apply mind before passing orders, says HC
No Hidden charges. Just easy booking. Easy and secure
Nagpur, July 14: The Bombay High Court has cautioned magistrates against
passing orders in criminal cases without a proper reason to it, before
asking the police to investigate cognizable offences.
A Nagpur bench of the High Court also deplored the tendency among people
to misuse provisions of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, to settle personal scores.
Coming down heavily upon persons putting criminal justice into motion
for frivolous reasons, a bench consisting of Justice Bhushan Gavai and
Justice P N Deshmukh rapped a top police officer, Shashikant Shinde, who
had charged his superiors with denying him promotion due to ill-will
and bias.
"This is nothing else but a glaring example of harassment and
humiliation to the officers of the State Government, at the instance of
another government employee, so as to settle scores with them on account
of his grievances of denial of promotion," the Judges observed.
Shinde, an IPS officer, currently posted as Deputy Inspector General of
Prison, Eastern Region (Nagpur), had filed a case against his superiors
in police department and Mantralaya alleging that he was denied
promotion due to bias and caste considerations.
Before parting with the matter the Judges observed, "We find that
various complaints are filed immediately after the Gram Panchayat
Elections, alleging offences under the Atrocities Act. We have no
hesitation in saying that in many of the instances, it was found that
the complaints were filed only to settle score with their opponents,
after defeat in the Gram Panchayat elections. The court expressed
displeasure over a number of orders passed by Magistrates under section
156(3) of Cr.Pc, directing Investigating Officer to register offence
without recording any reasons and without verifying as to whether the
complaint discloses the ingredients to constitute an offence or not."
The judges noted with deep concern gross abuse of process of law by
vested interests, saying "We have come across various cases where
private civil disputes arising out of property, monetary matters,
disputes between the members and office bearers of cooperative societies
and disputes between trustees of Charitable Trusts are made penal in
nature and filed either under Section 190 Cr.Pc read with section 200 or
under Section 156(3) of CrPC."
Under section 190 of Cr.Pc, a Magistrate can take cognisance of an
offence and under section 156(3) Cr.Pc, a Magistrate can order police to
probe a cognisable offence. "Needless to say that least that is
expected of the learned magistrate before passing order under Section
156(3) of CrPC is to satisfy himself, that taking the allegations to be
true in entirety, as to whether the ingredients to constitute the
offence alleged have been made out or not," said the Judges.
It was also expected of a learned Magistrate, while passing an order to
direct investigation, to give some reasons as to why he finds substance
in the complaint and as to how the complaint discloses ingredients to
constitute the offence alleged," the High Court bench noted.
The Magistrates should also take into consideration that passing such
orders mechanically in complaints which do not have any criminal
element, causes great hardships, humiliation, inconvenience and
harassment to the citizens, the Judges noted. "For no reasons, the
reputation of the citizens is put to stake as immediately after said
orders are passed, innocent citizens are termed as accused", the High
Court noted while taking judicial notice of this disturbing trend.
In the instant case, the High Court unequivocally held the complaint
made by Shinde against Maharashtra Director General of Police and senior
Home department officials and subsequent order passed by magistrate
under Section 156(3) of CrPC, as "nothing else but an abuse of process
of the court."
"We have no hesitation to hold that continuance of the proceedings would
amount to humiliation, harassment and persecution of the officers of
the state against whom allegations have been made in the complaint and
would perpetuate injustice," the High Court stated while quashing order
passed by magistrate and subsequent FIR lodged at Dhantoli Police
Station.
http://news.oneindia.in/2013/07/14/magistrates-should-apply-mind-before-passing-orders-hc-1259241.html
http://news.oneindia.in/2013/07/14/magistrates-should-apply-mind-before-passing-orders-hc-1259241.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)