July 30, 2010
A woman cannot book her in-laws under the Domestic Violence Act if she, along with her husband, had stayed abroad at the time of matrimonial dispute, the Delhi High Court held.
"There can be no domestic relationship of the wife of the son with the parents when the parents are not living along with the son and there can be no domestic relationship of a wife with the parents of her husband when the son, along with the wife, is living abroad, maintaining a family there and children are born abroad...," said Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra.
"In order to constitute a family and domestic relationship, it is necessary that the persons who constitute domestic relationship must be living together in the same house under one head. If they are living separately, then they are not a family but they are relatives related by blood or consanguinity to each other...," said Justice Dhingra in a judgement.
"Once a son grows up and he starts earning, marries, makes his separate home and sires (fathers) children, the burden of his wife cannot be put on to the shoulders of his father or brother on an estrangement between husband and wife...." the court said.
The Court also pulled up a family court judge for directing the in-laws, who stay in India, to pay jointly Rs 50,000 towards the monthly maintenance to their daughter-in -law, Payal Malik.
"I am surprised that the court below did not give weight to the judgment of New Jersy, USA, court where parties lived for seven and half years but assumed jurisdiction under the Domestic Violence(DV) Act because of the pure temporary residence of the wife in Delhi who is otherwise a resident of Hissar...," said the court and set aside the lower court's July 27, 2009, order to pay maintenance to the woman.
The Court's ruling came on an appeal filed by Harbans Lal Malik, father-in-law, Neelam (mother-in-law) and Varun Malik, brother-in-law besides Nagesh Malik, the husband, challenging the lower court's order.
Mr.Rebates
Saturday, July 31, 2010
StoryEpaperStocksToday's PaperWeatherHoroscope‘Abduction’ drama: Girl accuses parents of forcing marriage against wish
July 29, 2010
The 23-Year-old MBA student of Phase 3-A, Balpreet Kaur, whose father had alleged that she was abducted, denied that she was kidnapped, on thursday. She said she had gone with her lover on her own, as her parents allegedly wanted to forcibly marry her against her wishes.
Deposing in favour of Avinash Garg alias Rahul (25), a readymade garment merchant of Lehragaga in Sangrur, who was arrested for her alleged abduction, Kaur refused to go back to her home, as she claimed her parents were against her wish to marry Rahul.
In her statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC before the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM) Jaspinder Singh, Kaur reportedly said she was in a relationship with Rahul for the last five years and both of them wanted to marry each other, but her parents wanted her to marry the younger brother of her elder sister’s husband against her wishes.
She reportedly told the court that her mother has died and her father and stepmother did not approve of her inter-caste match with Rahul. “Since I wanted to marry Rahul, I willfully went along with him after I failed to convince my parents,” said Kaur.
After she refused to return home, the SDJM directed to send Kaur to Nari Niketan in Jalandhar before producing her again before the court on August 12.
Meanwhile, Rahul was also produced before the court today, after the expiry of his two-day police remand.
Since the prosecution did not seek his further custody, the SDJM remanded him to judicial custody and lodged him in Patiala Central Jail till August 12.
Admitting the bail plea moved by the defence counsel, the court issued notice to the state for reply on Friday, when the plea will come up for hearing.
On July 25, Kaur’s father Amar Singh Walia had reported to the police that his daughter, who had gone to attend her evening class from 6 pm to 8 pm at Punjab Technical University (PTU) study centre in Phase I on Saturday, had not returned home.
He said he received a call from Kaur’s mobile phone around 9.30 pm on Saturday, wherein an unidentified caller told him that they were taking along Balpreet and her scooter was left outside the Phase II gurdwara.
Next day, Walia claimed he received a ransom call of Rs 10 lakh, following which the police zeroed in on Rahul.
On Walia’s complaint, the police arrested Rahul on Wednesday, on the charges of kidnapping with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person and acts done in furtherance of common intention under Sections 365 and 34 of the IPC. But now after Kaur’s deposition, Rahul was likely to be absolved of all charges.
The 23-Year-old MBA student of Phase 3-A, Balpreet Kaur, whose father had alleged that she was abducted, denied that she was kidnapped, on thursday. She said she had gone with her lover on her own, as her parents allegedly wanted to forcibly marry her against her wishes.
Deposing in favour of Avinash Garg alias Rahul (25), a readymade garment merchant of Lehragaga in Sangrur, who was arrested for her alleged abduction, Kaur refused to go back to her home, as she claimed her parents were against her wish to marry Rahul.
In her statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC before the court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM) Jaspinder Singh, Kaur reportedly said she was in a relationship with Rahul for the last five years and both of them wanted to marry each other, but her parents wanted her to marry the younger brother of her elder sister’s husband against her wishes.
She reportedly told the court that her mother has died and her father and stepmother did not approve of her inter-caste match with Rahul. “Since I wanted to marry Rahul, I willfully went along with him after I failed to convince my parents,” said Kaur.
After she refused to return home, the SDJM directed to send Kaur to Nari Niketan in Jalandhar before producing her again before the court on August 12.
Meanwhile, Rahul was also produced before the court today, after the expiry of his two-day police remand.
Since the prosecution did not seek his further custody, the SDJM remanded him to judicial custody and lodged him in Patiala Central Jail till August 12.
Admitting the bail plea moved by the defence counsel, the court issued notice to the state for reply on Friday, when the plea will come up for hearing.
On July 25, Kaur’s father Amar Singh Walia had reported to the police that his daughter, who had gone to attend her evening class from 6 pm to 8 pm at Punjab Technical University (PTU) study centre in Phase I on Saturday, had not returned home.
He said he received a call from Kaur’s mobile phone around 9.30 pm on Saturday, wherein an unidentified caller told him that they were taking along Balpreet and her scooter was left outside the Phase II gurdwara.
Next day, Walia claimed he received a ransom call of Rs 10 lakh, following which the police zeroed in on Rahul.
On Walia’s complaint, the police arrested Rahul on Wednesday, on the charges of kidnapping with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person and acts done in furtherance of common intention under Sections 365 and 34 of the IPC. But now after Kaur’s deposition, Rahul was likely to be absolved of all charges.
Friday, July 30, 2010
‘Go slow on 498A’, state issues notice to police stations
July 21, 2010
With the increasing number of false complaints being registered by wives against their husband’s families and relatives under section 498A, the state government has decided to crack the whip on those who file such false complaints.
The state government, under the directives of the Union Home Ministry, has issued a notice (the copy of which is with this newspaper) to all police stations across the state to go slow in the registration of dowry and harassment to women related cases, especially in 498A.
The issue came to light when members of an NGO - Child Rights and Family Welfare, spoke to the media on Wednesday about the new directive to the police stations. “The Maharashtra Government and DGP have issued pre-arrest guidelines of people under section 498A of Indian Penal Code. A complaint under section 498A is first required to be referred to a counselling centre for counselling. Thereafter the concerned police station has to carry out an investigation of the complaint. The complaint should be registered and the arrest should be done only if the complaint has any substance in it. Since the time this penal provision was introduced in 1983 the provision was not reviewed and no built-in safety was provided to ensure misuse. This has caused a very large scale misuse of this section to settle personal scores. Innocent families are shattered and ruined in such a way that even Supreme Court has termed it as ‘Legal Terrorism’,” said Sandip Kedia, president of Child Rights and Family Welfare.
Speaking about the disadvantages of the section, he said, “The section is non bailable and non-compoundable, so the case cannot be withdrawn and hinders any scope of reconciliation between the couple and thus the whole family breaks. Since more than 95 per cent cases are found to be false, there should be Suo Moto Punishment for misuse of the law.
With the increasing number of false complaints being registered by wives against their husband’s families and relatives under section 498A, the state government has decided to crack the whip on those who file such false complaints.
The state government, under the directives of the Union Home Ministry, has issued a notice (the copy of which is with this newspaper) to all police stations across the state to go slow in the registration of dowry and harassment to women related cases, especially in 498A.
The issue came to light when members of an NGO - Child Rights and Family Welfare, spoke to the media on Wednesday about the new directive to the police stations. “The Maharashtra Government and DGP have issued pre-arrest guidelines of people under section 498A of Indian Penal Code. A complaint under section 498A is first required to be referred to a counselling centre for counselling. Thereafter the concerned police station has to carry out an investigation of the complaint. The complaint should be registered and the arrest should be done only if the complaint has any substance in it. Since the time this penal provision was introduced in 1983 the provision was not reviewed and no built-in safety was provided to ensure misuse. This has caused a very large scale misuse of this section to settle personal scores. Innocent families are shattered and ruined in such a way that even Supreme Court has termed it as ‘Legal Terrorism’,” said Sandip Kedia, president of Child Rights and Family Welfare.
Speaking about the disadvantages of the section, he said, “The section is non bailable and non-compoundable, so the case cannot be withdrawn and hinders any scope of reconciliation between the couple and thus the whole family breaks. Since more than 95 per cent cases are found to be false, there should be Suo Moto Punishment for misuse of the law.
PF scam: CBI indicts ex-SC judge, 23 other judges
July 28, 2010
NEW DELHI: This is the biggest ever indictment of the country's judiciary. An extensive CBI probe into the fradulent withdrawal of Rs 6.58 crore from the provident fund accounts of class III and IV employees in the Ghaziabad district court, has found a former Supreme Court judge along with 23 other sitting and retired judges of Allahabad High Court and lower court judges guilty of misdemeanour.
After investigating as many as 47 judges for their alleged role in the scam, the CBI on Wednesday submitted a report to the Supreme Court detailing the misdemeanor and acts of omission and commission of those found guilty.
Though the judges in question are being let off because of lack of "prosecutable evidence", the findings of CBI probe can jolt those who play down the growing instance of irregularities in judiciary, saying that the phenomenon was limited to lower rungs.
The report perused by a Bench comprising Justices D K Jain, V S Sirpurkar and G S Singhvi contained the name of Justice Tarun Chatterjee, who retired on January 14 this year after nearly five and a half years as SC judge.
Though the former SC judge had denied any role in the wrong doing during the questioning done with prior permission of the then CJI, the CBI has said he had committed a "folly" which was an "indiscretion without any criminal intent". The Bench deferred a decision on the request from counsel Prashant Bhushan to make CBI's findings public.
Attorney General G E Vahanvati informed the Bench that the report was also being given to Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia and Allahabad High Court Chief Justice for taking action on the administrative side against the 24 judges, who were found to have committed acts of commission and omission but were not being proceeded against due to lack of "prosecutable evidence".
What was worse, the AG vehemently argued for transfer of the trial of the PF scam from Ghaziabad to Delhi while accusing the sitting district judge of interfering with the trial by attempting to rope in the Uttar Pradesh Police as prosecution in the case and asking CBI to take a back seat despite the agency having been entrusted the task of investigation by the apex court.
Vahanvati explained that if the district judge, under whose administrative jurisdiction the CBI judge conducting the trial functions, was to take such a stand, then the trial would be vitiated. More so, because the CBI has already chargesheeted six judges along with 72 others in the scam.
The Bench immediately stayed further trial proceedings before the special judge (CBI) in the PF scam that was spread from the year 2001 to 2008 with the accused, Asuthosh Asthana, as treasury officer playing a key role. The whistle on the scam was blown by the special judge, Ghaziabad, Rama Jain, who filed a complaint on February 15, 2008. Asthana died under mysterious circumstances in Dasana jail in September last year.
If it questioned the behaviour of 24 judges, then CBI also gave a clean chit to 17 other judges, including Justice S C Nigam of Allahabad HC, against whom it found no material evidence.
"In respect of 24 judges/judicial officers, sufficient prosecutable evidence was not available warranting their prosecution. A CBI report has been sent to the competent authorities for appropriate action against them for various acts of commission and omission," the agency said.
The CBI has found details of the heartless manner in which the hard-earned PF money of class III and IV employees of Ghaziabad courts was illegally siphoned out and lavishly spent on furniture, crockery, mobiles, electronic gadgets and appliances, laptops, rail tickets, taxi fare and other luxury items for the judges.
Those indicted district judges, who headed the Ghaziabad judiciary during the scam period, had almost made it a `way of life' to burn holes in low-grade employees' PF accounts not only for purchase of luxury items, but even for photography and video-recording of family functions and marriages.
"About 500 strips of negatives of the photographs, one CD and two mini video cassettes said to be related to the functions of various members of judiciary were recovered," CBI sources told TOI quoting from an earlier status report submitted to the SC.
"Out of the proceeds of crime, R P Mishra, R P Yadav, R N Mishra, A K Singh, R S Chauney and Arun Kumar -- who were district judges at various periods -- obtained valuable things/services in the form of monthly ration, fruits, vegetables, sweets, jewellery, clothing, saris, expensive electronic goods like computers, TV, fridge, washing machine, mobile phones, crockery items etc, availed taxis, transportation of goods and wooden furniture in their houses," the CBI said.
It is not that these judges could not have afforded mobile phones. But, as these came free, they seldom flinched in accepting freebies provided by Asthana courtesy the PF money of unsuspecting employees, the CBI found. "As per Asthana, he had provided about 60-70 mobile phone instruments to various members of the judiciary," the agency said.
Asthana, who as the treasury officer was tasked to safeguard the PF money of the employees, allegedly did not think twice before opening the strings of the illegally filled purse to meet the expenses for transporting articles -- furniture, crockery, utensils which again were bought from the PF money -- to the residences of the judges.
"Several invoices containing entries in respect of trucks/vehicles provided in last six years containing about 35 entries related to Asthana, sent to various judges of higher and subordinate judiciary have been found," CBI claimed. The trucks had an unbelievably smooth passage through states before reaching their destinations mainly because they were accompanied by a judicial certificate.
"Four original certificates said to be issued by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, certifying that the truck numbers mentioned in the certificate were carrying the articles of members of judiciary, which were given to the truck driver for smooth passage of goods while passing several states, have also been recovered," it said.
CBI also claimed to have recovered 28 bills of sale of crockery to Asthana and the monogram of the district judge, Ghaziabad, for the year 2006-07. It has also found that Asthana allegedly picked up 43 taxi bills of judges and paid them from the PF money.
"About 540 assorted slips, bills, pieces of papers, sketches etc. were got recovered from the carpenter from his wife. These bills pertain to purchase of various raw material for furniture items during last seven years," the CBI said. This probably completes the chain -- making of furniture and their transportation to the residences of the judges far away from Ghaziabad.
The carpenter, who made the furniture, appears to have impressed the judges with his skill, for he was called to the residences of the judges with fresh orders and he answered these calls travelling with rail tickets purchased from the PF money.
He was called to the judges' residences away from Ghaziabad in Lucknow and Allahabad as many as 17 times and his train tickets were allegedly bought from the PF money, the agency suspected.
NEW DELHI: This is the biggest ever indictment of the country's judiciary. An extensive CBI probe into the fradulent withdrawal of Rs 6.58 crore from the provident fund accounts of class III and IV employees in the Ghaziabad district court, has found a former Supreme Court judge along with 23 other sitting and retired judges of Allahabad High Court and lower court judges guilty of misdemeanour.
After investigating as many as 47 judges for their alleged role in the scam, the CBI on Wednesday submitted a report to the Supreme Court detailing the misdemeanor and acts of omission and commission of those found guilty.
Though the judges in question are being let off because of lack of "prosecutable evidence", the findings of CBI probe can jolt those who play down the growing instance of irregularities in judiciary, saying that the phenomenon was limited to lower rungs.
The report perused by a Bench comprising Justices D K Jain, V S Sirpurkar and G S Singhvi contained the name of Justice Tarun Chatterjee, who retired on January 14 this year after nearly five and a half years as SC judge.
Though the former SC judge had denied any role in the wrong doing during the questioning done with prior permission of the then CJI, the CBI has said he had committed a "folly" which was an "indiscretion without any criminal intent". The Bench deferred a decision on the request from counsel Prashant Bhushan to make CBI's findings public.
Attorney General G E Vahanvati informed the Bench that the report was also being given to Chief Justice of India S H Kapadia and Allahabad High Court Chief Justice for taking action on the administrative side against the 24 judges, who were found to have committed acts of commission and omission but were not being proceeded against due to lack of "prosecutable evidence".
What was worse, the AG vehemently argued for transfer of the trial of the PF scam from Ghaziabad to Delhi while accusing the sitting district judge of interfering with the trial by attempting to rope in the Uttar Pradesh Police as prosecution in the case and asking CBI to take a back seat despite the agency having been entrusted the task of investigation by the apex court.
Vahanvati explained that if the district judge, under whose administrative jurisdiction the CBI judge conducting the trial functions, was to take such a stand, then the trial would be vitiated. More so, because the CBI has already chargesheeted six judges along with 72 others in the scam.
The Bench immediately stayed further trial proceedings before the special judge (CBI) in the PF scam that was spread from the year 2001 to 2008 with the accused, Asuthosh Asthana, as treasury officer playing a key role. The whistle on the scam was blown by the special judge, Ghaziabad, Rama Jain, who filed a complaint on February 15, 2008. Asthana died under mysterious circumstances in Dasana jail in September last year.
If it questioned the behaviour of 24 judges, then CBI also gave a clean chit to 17 other judges, including Justice S C Nigam of Allahabad HC, against whom it found no material evidence.
"In respect of 24 judges/judicial officers, sufficient prosecutable evidence was not available warranting their prosecution. A CBI report has been sent to the competent authorities for appropriate action against them for various acts of commission and omission," the agency said.
The CBI has found details of the heartless manner in which the hard-earned PF money of class III and IV employees of Ghaziabad courts was illegally siphoned out and lavishly spent on furniture, crockery, mobiles, electronic gadgets and appliances, laptops, rail tickets, taxi fare and other luxury items for the judges.
Those indicted district judges, who headed the Ghaziabad judiciary during the scam period, had almost made it a `way of life' to burn holes in low-grade employees' PF accounts not only for purchase of luxury items, but even for photography and video-recording of family functions and marriages.
"About 500 strips of negatives of the photographs, one CD and two mini video cassettes said to be related to the functions of various members of judiciary were recovered," CBI sources told TOI quoting from an earlier status report submitted to the SC.
"Out of the proceeds of crime, R P Mishra, R P Yadav, R N Mishra, A K Singh, R S Chauney and Arun Kumar -- who were district judges at various periods -- obtained valuable things/services in the form of monthly ration, fruits, vegetables, sweets, jewellery, clothing, saris, expensive electronic goods like computers, TV, fridge, washing machine, mobile phones, crockery items etc, availed taxis, transportation of goods and wooden furniture in their houses," the CBI said.
It is not that these judges could not have afforded mobile phones. But, as these came free, they seldom flinched in accepting freebies provided by Asthana courtesy the PF money of unsuspecting employees, the CBI found. "As per Asthana, he had provided about 60-70 mobile phone instruments to various members of the judiciary," the agency said.
Asthana, who as the treasury officer was tasked to safeguard the PF money of the employees, allegedly did not think twice before opening the strings of the illegally filled purse to meet the expenses for transporting articles -- furniture, crockery, utensils which again were bought from the PF money -- to the residences of the judges.
"Several invoices containing entries in respect of trucks/vehicles provided in last six years containing about 35 entries related to Asthana, sent to various judges of higher and subordinate judiciary have been found," CBI claimed. The trucks had an unbelievably smooth passage through states before reaching their destinations mainly because they were accompanied by a judicial certificate.
"Four original certificates said to be issued by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, certifying that the truck numbers mentioned in the certificate were carrying the articles of members of judiciary, which were given to the truck driver for smooth passage of goods while passing several states, have also been recovered," it said.
CBI also claimed to have recovered 28 bills of sale of crockery to Asthana and the monogram of the district judge, Ghaziabad, for the year 2006-07. It has also found that Asthana allegedly picked up 43 taxi bills of judges and paid them from the PF money.
"About 540 assorted slips, bills, pieces of papers, sketches etc. were got recovered from the carpenter from his wife. These bills pertain to purchase of various raw material for furniture items during last seven years," the CBI said. This probably completes the chain -- making of furniture and their transportation to the residences of the judges far away from Ghaziabad.
The carpenter, who made the furniture, appears to have impressed the judges with his skill, for he was called to the residences of the judges with fresh orders and he answered these calls travelling with rail tickets purchased from the PF money.
He was called to the judges' residences away from Ghaziabad in Lucknow and Allahabad as many as 17 times and his train tickets were allegedly bought from the PF money, the agency suspected.
Boy in court: saw dad rape sister... er, mother taught me to say so
July 29, 2010
A seven-year-old on Wednesday stood in a city court’s witness box for two hours describing how his father had allegedly raped his teenage sister in his presence, only to later reveal that his mother had told him to depose so.
“My mother, aunt and uncle have asked me to say these things. I don’t remember any thing happened on that day. But my mother tutored me for three days on what I should tell the court,” said the boy, in Standard III.
According to the prosecution, the 44-year old father had raped his 17-year-old daughter several times. The girl had claimed her brother stood a mute spectator. The boy’s initial claims included, “My father asked me to strip my sister and then attacked her.”
The contradiction came after the defence asked if he had been discussing the event with his mother. He then admitted he had been tutored.
A seven-year-old on Wednesday stood in a city court’s witness box for two hours describing how his father had allegedly raped his teenage sister in his presence, only to later reveal that his mother had told him to depose so.
“My mother, aunt and uncle have asked me to say these things. I don’t remember any thing happened on that day. But my mother tutored me for three days on what I should tell the court,” said the boy, in Standard III.
According to the prosecution, the 44-year old father had raped his 17-year-old daughter several times. The girl had claimed her brother stood a mute spectator. The boy’s initial claims included, “My father asked me to strip my sister and then attacked her.”
The contradiction came after the defence asked if he had been discussing the event with his mother. He then admitted he had been tutored.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Marriage – A financial slavery for men
July 28, 2010
It reminds me of Honorable Justice G Raghuram’s statement in a seminar, “Too much audio-visual input jeopardizes the cognitive ability of the brain” when I see the overwhelming amount of anti-male news and misandry in the media, perpetrated by women’s rights activists, popularly known as “Feminists” – though I prefer to call them as feminazis.
Ever since I grew up, I have been overfed with a feeling that women have always had a raw deal and thus never challenged the rampant misandry in the society – until I realized truth the hard way – by falling victim to the same misandry. However, it led to me an ultimate realization – that in actuality it’s the men who have always had a raw deal in the name of women having it.
One of the foremost social institutions where men get a raw deal and that too, a visible one, is MARRIAGE – wherein men have only responsibilities and punishments to deal with; no peace, no rights.
It is fairly obvious with the fact that there is not only the expectation that a man will take care of the woman’s happiness, but there are umpteen unchallenged anti-male and unconstitutional laws to enforce the same, albeit against a man’s wish.
Moreover, I fail to understand how one human being can ever be expected to take care of the happiness of another human being when happiness is a purely subjective and personalized feeling; what makes one human being happy may not make another human being equally happy or happy at all.
But perverted social setups expect men to take care of the happiness of their wives and punish them if they fail to do so, making it very easy for any wife to rule upon her husband.
Forget rights, men do not even have the basic right to peaceful existence – a man cannot even break the shackles of a tumultuous marriage without sufficient heartburn and financial rampage. Multitude of maintenance laws for the same alleged cause of action ensure that a man is grinned through the financial juggernaut of male-hatred before he gets that much deserved “Freedom” from his torturous and tumultuous wife.
And one such law is the Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) which is quintessentially the “No-Fault Maintenance Law” wherein a person can get money from a man merely on the basis of the whiff of an existence of a relationship with a man be it his spouse, parents or children. This fact itself shows how men are treated as FREE ATM MACHINES by the society.
And now, “NCW – The hotbed of male hatred” has reinforced one of its earlier proposed highly anti-male recommendations – to award maintenance to a wife even if she is proven to be living in adultery. NCW stands for National Commission for Women and is considered to be an astute body championing the cause of women and it is the same body that seems to be telling the very women it is formed for – “Hey, go ahead and sleep with multiple partners, I will ensure you get payment from every man you sleep with along with social sympathy.”
Is the NCW by any means trying to reduce the gap between “Housewives and Prostitutes” given the fact that the Supreme Court of India recommended legalizing prostitution and the Govt. of India clubbed the “Housewives, prostitutes and beggars” into the same category in the census 2011?
Anyways, the NCW is free to do anything it wants to do with women, as long as it does not disturb men, I am least bothered. However, the current recommendation by the NCW in the article – “Lies and the Law in Indian Divorce Battles” does bother me as it intensifies the treatment of men as FREE ATM MACHINES.
Interestingly, NCW claims that it has made this recommendation after it found that in “70% of maintenance cases under Section 125, men get away with the adultery clause which exempts reliefs to wives.
When confronted with an RTI Application the NCW drew flak and reported that it had “no data at its disposal to back its claims”.
Moreover, a quick glance through the RTI reply also tells us the judgments from various High Courts and the Supreme Court, based on which the NCW came up with the recommendations. It is ironical that 80% of the judgments refer to the lacunae in the law which make it difficult for old parents to seek maintenance from their sons and it is the same judgments referring which NCW makes this blasphemous recommendation of making adultery a reward winning act for women .
These facts itself prove how unscrupulous the NCW is from an organization point of view. It goes ahead and makes a wild recommendation, based on hallucinated assumptions proliferating misandry which affects 33 million odd men in the country and a social factor that contributes to the skyrocketing suicides rates of married men!
And, the Indian Govt. henpecked before a bunch of feminazi male haters bows down to every malicious and pernicious design by them and goes on creating either a new anti-male law or intensifies existing ones and almost all of them target towards systematic extortion of men – the easiest way being from husbands.
The moot question that remains is, “Is not marriage a financial slavery for men?” Either toil like a slave or get ruined financially.
It reminds me of Honorable Justice G Raghuram’s statement in a seminar, “Too much audio-visual input jeopardizes the cognitive ability of the brain” when I see the overwhelming amount of anti-male news and misandry in the media, perpetrated by women’s rights activists, popularly known as “Feminists” – though I prefer to call them as feminazis.
Ever since I grew up, I have been overfed with a feeling that women have always had a raw deal and thus never challenged the rampant misandry in the society – until I realized truth the hard way – by falling victim to the same misandry. However, it led to me an ultimate realization – that in actuality it’s the men who have always had a raw deal in the name of women having it.
One of the foremost social institutions where men get a raw deal and that too, a visible one, is MARRIAGE – wherein men have only responsibilities and punishments to deal with; no peace, no rights.
It is fairly obvious with the fact that there is not only the expectation that a man will take care of the woman’s happiness, but there are umpteen unchallenged anti-male and unconstitutional laws to enforce the same, albeit against a man’s wish.
Moreover, I fail to understand how one human being can ever be expected to take care of the happiness of another human being when happiness is a purely subjective and personalized feeling; what makes one human being happy may not make another human being equally happy or happy at all.
But perverted social setups expect men to take care of the happiness of their wives and punish them if they fail to do so, making it very easy for any wife to rule upon her husband.
Forget rights, men do not even have the basic right to peaceful existence – a man cannot even break the shackles of a tumultuous marriage without sufficient heartburn and financial rampage. Multitude of maintenance laws for the same alleged cause of action ensure that a man is grinned through the financial juggernaut of male-hatred before he gets that much deserved “Freedom” from his torturous and tumultuous wife.
And one such law is the Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) which is quintessentially the “No-Fault Maintenance Law” wherein a person can get money from a man merely on the basis of the whiff of an existence of a relationship with a man be it his spouse, parents or children. This fact itself shows how men are treated as FREE ATM MACHINES by the society.
And now, “NCW – The hotbed of male hatred” has reinforced one of its earlier proposed highly anti-male recommendations – to award maintenance to a wife even if she is proven to be living in adultery. NCW stands for National Commission for Women and is considered to be an astute body championing the cause of women and it is the same body that seems to be telling the very women it is formed for – “Hey, go ahead and sleep with multiple partners, I will ensure you get payment from every man you sleep with along with social sympathy.”
Is the NCW by any means trying to reduce the gap between “Housewives and Prostitutes” given the fact that the Supreme Court of India recommended legalizing prostitution and the Govt. of India clubbed the “Housewives, prostitutes and beggars” into the same category in the census 2011?
Anyways, the NCW is free to do anything it wants to do with women, as long as it does not disturb men, I am least bothered. However, the current recommendation by the NCW in the article – “Lies and the Law in Indian Divorce Battles” does bother me as it intensifies the treatment of men as FREE ATM MACHINES.
Interestingly, NCW claims that it has made this recommendation after it found that in “70% of maintenance cases under Section 125, men get away with the adultery clause which exempts reliefs to wives.
When confronted with an RTI Application the NCW drew flak and reported that it had “no data at its disposal to back its claims”.
Moreover, a quick glance through the RTI reply also tells us the judgments from various High Courts and the Supreme Court, based on which the NCW came up with the recommendations. It is ironical that 80% of the judgments refer to the lacunae in the law which make it difficult for old parents to seek maintenance from their sons and it is the same judgments referring which NCW makes this blasphemous recommendation of making adultery a reward winning act for women .
These facts itself prove how unscrupulous the NCW is from an organization point of view. It goes ahead and makes a wild recommendation, based on hallucinated assumptions proliferating misandry which affects 33 million odd men in the country and a social factor that contributes to the skyrocketing suicides rates of married men!
And, the Indian Govt. henpecked before a bunch of feminazi male haters bows down to every malicious and pernicious design by them and goes on creating either a new anti-male law or intensifies existing ones and almost all of them target towards systematic extortion of men – the easiest way being from husbands.
The moot question that remains is, “Is not marriage a financial slavery for men?” Either toil like a slave or get ruined financially.
Any NRI won 498a/DV cases staying outside India?
Below are the steps.
by 498adynamite
Have these documents ready by your lawyer before you go to India
PRE-CONDITION
1.Bail Papers for AB, Transit Bail, regular Bail, Overseas travel
permission petition
2.Get all your bail papers to USA and Sign them in advance without
date and send to your Lawyer.
3.In any situation, be ready to go to High court if lower court
denies any of your bail/passport petitions
4.Have cash around 500k INR.
5.Letters from your employer about your vacation and return date.
STEPS TO FOLLOW
1.Be brave and think whatever happens I will come back.
2.We are not going to Pakistan or Afghanistan,we are going to our home land.
3.Do not inform anybody in India that you are planning to Visit India,
except Lawyer and important 1-2 persons
4.If your destination is
Mumbai\Delhi\Calcutta\Hyderabad\Chennai
Bangalore, take ticket to
Different State and city.
The reason,is if different state police arrest you, it takes time for them to take you to your home state.
The cops must inform your home state cops who have case against
you and they have to travel to your place and then take you to home state with them.So,you can
apply for bail immediately once you land in India.
5.Apply AB and regular Bail immediately once you land in India. It should be one cell phone call to your lawyer
6.If you get arrested, do not panic, apply for Transit Bail
7.Do not go to your home town, stay underground and apply for regular bail by your lawyer
8.Once you get regular bail then,go to Home town and
9.Apply for permission to travel to Abroad along with passport since
you are working in Overseas and its your bread and butter issue.
a) Get 2-3 letters from your employer and client stating that, if you
do not join them back after your vacation, you will lose your job
(have these letter ready before you go to India)
10.Take written letter from judge which says, you have permission to
travel anywhere in the world. This letter acts as
counter, if cops try to stop you based on your case in airport.
generally, the Judge will grant you permission to travel with bond
ranging from 50k-500k INR.
POST-CONDITION
1.Once you receive your passport and letter from judge, fly within 24 hours,
because your opposition may go to High court or supreme court for appeal to cancel your travel permission.
2. Again,try to board international flight from a different state.
3. When you come back to Overseas,come in early hours of the day
between 3-5 AM,so that the immigration officer will not
question much as he will be in a hurry to clear the queue.This helps
you if do not have a job.
BOTTOM LINE
To be frank.If you hire a local lawyer in your hometown who knows
everyone in court premises, your work will be done in
4-6 weeks.
First week bail
Second week passport petition
Third/Fourth week counter by opposition party for on your bail petition and judgment on your passport.
Do not use any of your personal cell phone or land lines which are on your family surnames or friends name.
Always prefer to meet in person and do not disclose/discuss any important issues on phone.
by 498adynamite
Have these documents ready by your lawyer before you go to India
PRE-CONDITION
1.Bail Papers for AB, Transit Bail, regular Bail, Overseas travel
permission petition
2.Get all your bail papers to USA and Sign them in advance without
date and send to your Lawyer.
3.In any situation, be ready to go to High court if lower court
denies any of your bail/passport petitions
4.Have cash around 500k INR.
5.Letters from your employer about your vacation and return date.
STEPS TO FOLLOW
1.Be brave and think whatever happens I will come back.
2.We are not going to Pakistan or Afghanistan,we are going to our home land.
3.Do not inform anybody in India that you are planning to Visit India,
except Lawyer and important 1-2 persons
4.If your destination is
Mumbai\Delhi\Calcutta\Hyderabad\Chennai
Bangalore, take ticket to
Different State and city.
The reason,is if different state police arrest you, it takes time for them to take you to your home state.
The cops must inform your home state cops who have case against
you and they have to travel to your place and then take you to home state with them.So,you can
apply for bail immediately once you land in India.
5.Apply AB and regular Bail immediately once you land in India. It should be one cell phone call to your lawyer
6.If you get arrested, do not panic, apply for Transit Bail
7.Do not go to your home town, stay underground and apply for regular bail by your lawyer
8.Once you get regular bail then,go to Home town and
9.Apply for permission to travel to Abroad along with passport since
you are working in Overseas and its your bread and butter issue.
a) Get 2-3 letters from your employer and client stating that, if you
do not join them back after your vacation, you will lose your job
(have these letter ready before you go to India)
10.Take written letter from judge which says, you have permission to
travel anywhere in the world. This letter acts as
counter, if cops try to stop you based on your case in airport.
generally, the Judge will grant you permission to travel with bond
ranging from 50k-500k INR.
POST-CONDITION
1.Once you receive your passport and letter from judge, fly within 24 hours,
because your opposition may go to High court or supreme court for appeal to cancel your travel permission.
2. Again,try to board international flight from a different state.
3. When you come back to Overseas,come in early hours of the day
between 3-5 AM,so that the immigration officer will not
question much as he will be in a hurry to clear the queue.This helps
you if do not have a job.
BOTTOM LINE
To be frank.If you hire a local lawyer in your hometown who knows
everyone in court premises, your work will be done in
4-6 weeks.
First week bail
Second week passport petition
Third/Fourth week counter by opposition party for on your bail petition and judgment on your passport.
Do not use any of your personal cell phone or land lines which are on your family surnames or friends name.
Always prefer to meet in person and do not disclose/discuss any important issues on phone.
Brother, not husband, accused under Domestic Violence Act
July 28, 2010
For once, a husband is not the accused in case of domestic violence. A 42-year-old woman from Colaba has recently invoked the Act against her brother.
Yasmin Hashmat Ullah
In a petition filed in the Esplanade Court, Yasmin Hashmat Ullah, a teacher with an international school in Mazgaon, alleged that her younger brother Aman tortured her because he wanted her to leave the house they share.
Yasmin said not only that Aman physically assaulted her but also that he harassed her mentally by blocking her room’s ventilation, switching the lights on and off while she was sleeping, misbehaving with her visitors, blocking her mail and removing her name from the ration card. She also alleged in the petition that her brother, an event manager with a reputed firm, and his wife “took photographs of her changing clothes and recorded her conversations”.
Yasmin alleged that Aman and his wife threatened “they would create such a disastrous condition for her that she would have no option but to leave the premises.” The family lives in the 990 sq ft apartment at Crescent House in Colaba. The house is in the name of their late mother Shamshunissa Ullah.
Though the Domestic Violence Act is usually associated with abuse in a marriage, it can be used for the protection of any woman of the family, not just the wife. Lawyer and women’s rights’ activist Flavia Agnes says, “A sister, mother, daughter or a girlfriend in a live-in relationship can file a case under the Domestic Violence Act. We don’t usually come across cases like these because there is not enough awareness about the Act. Also, in case of blood relations, women prefer to settle the matter outside court.”
Explaining her decision to go to court, Yasmin, said, “I am embarrassed about taking legal action against my own brother. My sisters have urged him several times to sort out differences. But things kept turning from bad to worse. I had no choice but go to court.”
A report filed by the Women and Children’s Cell in this matter noted, “She has been given only a small bed and not even her own cupboard to keep her clothes. It is crucial to give the complainant police protection in the house.” The court recently appointed a protection officer for Yasmin.
Aman said, “I don’t want to speak about my sister because of the ongoing litigation. But I’d like to say that there is a threat to my wife’s life.”
The next hearing in the case is on August 2.
For once, a husband is not the accused in case of domestic violence. A 42-year-old woman from Colaba has recently invoked the Act against her brother.
Yasmin Hashmat Ullah
In a petition filed in the Esplanade Court, Yasmin Hashmat Ullah, a teacher with an international school in Mazgaon, alleged that her younger brother Aman tortured her because he wanted her to leave the house they share.
Yasmin said not only that Aman physically assaulted her but also that he harassed her mentally by blocking her room’s ventilation, switching the lights on and off while she was sleeping, misbehaving with her visitors, blocking her mail and removing her name from the ration card. She also alleged in the petition that her brother, an event manager with a reputed firm, and his wife “took photographs of her changing clothes and recorded her conversations”.
Yasmin alleged that Aman and his wife threatened “they would create such a disastrous condition for her that she would have no option but to leave the premises.” The family lives in the 990 sq ft apartment at Crescent House in Colaba. The house is in the name of their late mother Shamshunissa Ullah.
Though the Domestic Violence Act is usually associated with abuse in a marriage, it can be used for the protection of any woman of the family, not just the wife. Lawyer and women’s rights’ activist Flavia Agnes says, “A sister, mother, daughter or a girlfriend in a live-in relationship can file a case under the Domestic Violence Act. We don’t usually come across cases like these because there is not enough awareness about the Act. Also, in case of blood relations, women prefer to settle the matter outside court.”
Explaining her decision to go to court, Yasmin, said, “I am embarrassed about taking legal action against my own brother. My sisters have urged him several times to sort out differences. But things kept turning from bad to worse. I had no choice but go to court.”
A report filed by the Women and Children’s Cell in this matter noted, “She has been given only a small bed and not even her own cupboard to keep her clothes. It is crucial to give the complainant police protection in the house.” The court recently appointed a protection officer for Yasmin.
Aman said, “I don’t want to speak about my sister because of the ongoing litigation. But I’d like to say that there is a threat to my wife’s life.”
The next hearing in the case is on August 2.
Indian woman fined for seeking divorce on impotence grounds
July 27, 2010
NEW DELHI — An Indian court has slapped a hefty fine on a woman who cited her husband's sexual impotence as grounds for divorce, a report said Tuesday.
A judge in central Madhya Pradesh state ordered Vandana Gurjar on Monday to pay 200,000 rupees (4,440 dollars) to her estranged husband Hemant Chhalotre, the Press Trust of India said.
Chhalotre had complained the impotence accusation "rendered him unmarriageable and sullied his prestige," the news agency said.
The amount of the fine far exceeds the annual income of millions of Indians.
Gurjar married Chhalotre nine years ago but left him after just three months, and later sought a divorce -- granted by the courts -- on the grounds that she "could not have conjugal bliss with Chhalotre as he was impotent," the news agency said.
Chhalotre then sued his wife for defaming his manhood.
NEW DELHI — An Indian court has slapped a hefty fine on a woman who cited her husband's sexual impotence as grounds for divorce, a report said Tuesday.
A judge in central Madhya Pradesh state ordered Vandana Gurjar on Monday to pay 200,000 rupees (4,440 dollars) to her estranged husband Hemant Chhalotre, the Press Trust of India said.
Chhalotre had complained the impotence accusation "rendered him unmarriageable and sullied his prestige," the news agency said.
The amount of the fine far exceeds the annual income of millions of Indians.
Gurjar married Chhalotre nine years ago but left him after just three months, and later sought a divorce -- granted by the courts -- on the grounds that she "could not have conjugal bliss with Chhalotre as he was impotent," the news agency said.
Chhalotre then sued his wife for defaming his manhood.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
10 Worst Ways to Break Up
These are all horrible ways to break up, but nothing can beat a break up in India, with a DV act 2005, or Sexual harrasment case filed against you, or worst IPC 498a, how can anyone beat an Great Indian break up? Hamara Desh is the best in the world for abusing Men!
10 Worst Ways to Break Up
A breakup is a serious, earth-shattering moment that in most cases leads to a
long road of emotional recovery. So, why did Berger think it was even REMOTELY
OK to break up with Carrie Bradshaw... on a Post-It? Guess what Berger - it
wasn't. And it's still not.
Before we get to our Top 10, let's acknowledge first that there are serious
long-term marriages and relationships that end horribly, with lying, infidelity,
abuse, and even breaking the law and that those breaks are significantly more
intense than what we're talking about here. This list covers the ways to break
up with someone that movies are made of, the ones that you can pass along to
friends with the "can you believe!!!???" disclaimer, and the ones that
hopefully, someday, you'll look back on and laugh about.
We asked our BounceBack members, who have been through some of the worst
breakups and divorces we've ever seen, to tell us the worst ways they've been
left to pick up the pieces and move on.
Some stories are hilarious, some crazy, some embarrassing, and some, truly
unbelievable. We've forgone some of the specifics and categorized everything we
heard into the 10 worst ways. From what was said to where it went down, this is
probably only the tip of the iceberg - so let us know your worst breakup story!
The 10 Worst Ways to Break Up With Someone
10. ON VACATION: Who would you most likely want to be stuck on a deserted island
with? Not someone who's just told you "it's not working out," we're quite sure.
Not only have you now wasted your time and money, but you can't leave the
situation easily without added plane fares and stress. If this happens to you,
break away and turn your trip into a rejuvenating self-improvement retreat...
you'll need it.
9. IN A TEXT MESSAGE: Ah, the text. The modern-day version of the Post-It. Too
wussy to do it in person? Text away, wuss.
8. ON FACEBOOK: Nothing like logging on to find your loved one tagged in a
compromising photo with a complete stranger...to you, at least. Why this is
called the "World Wide Web" and some people can't figure out how they got busted
is beyond us. Besides, it's way too trendy these days - be original, people!
7. AROUND THE FAMILY: Don't make it a family affair - you'll seriously regret
it. Whether at a sibling's wedding (see #6), a family vacation (see #10), or
meeting the family for the first time (really!?), this one is clearly ridden
with minefields that will lead to nothing but trouble. If this happens to you,
at least you've got your "people" nearby to protect you, support you, and
promptly kick your brand-new-ex to the curb.
6. AT A WEDDING: The wedding. The defining moment for any couple. The pinnacle
of celebrating relationships and love. The day they'll remember as the best day
of their lives. Forever. Guess the pressure got to you, huh?
5. AT YOUR "SPECIAL PLACE": That restaurant where we had our first date...the
bar where you told me you loved me...the bench in the park where we'd sit every
Sunday... Why on earth would anyone think this is a good idea? Let the special
place stay special. Just like there are other fish in the sea, there are other
places in the whole world. If they can't find another place, you should
definitely find another fish.
4. IN BED: Come again? Talk about ruining the mood. At least wait until you're
clothed. This one is so embarrassing that we're having visions of the recurring
dream where you're on stage in front of everyone you know in nothing but your
underwear. Except you're not even wearing underwear.
3. ON VALENTINE'S DAY: There are 365 days in the year, and ONE dedicated to
celebrating love. It's not like you can't claim you didn't "know" it was
Valentine's Day - the stores, the ads, the cards have been in your face for
weeks. Pick another day. It's that simple. Don't ruin this day forever for
someone, unless you're really in need of some bad karma. (New Year's Eve and
Birthdays received honorable mentions.)
2. BY DOING NOTHING: It was tough not giving this the Number 1 honor, and we're
still not sure. Being forced to figure something out by yourself is sometimes
the hardest and most humiliating thing of all. Coming home to find your love
gone, with no note, no calls, no anything may just be the worst way to handle a
breakup. It is definitely the WIMPIEST. Just remember that. You do this, you are
weak.
1. BY CHEATING: Sadly, this is the most common response we received - and the
stories ran the gamut, from the one-night-stand, to the ongoing affair, to the
ongoing affair that you only found out about via "the new person," to the
unspeakable announcement that your boyfriend or girlfriend is engaged to someone
else (WHAT?!?). To these we simply say, come ON. Just break it off before you
cheat. You won't hurt our feelings, we promise.
The bottom line to all of this?
If this happened to you, we can 100% guarantee that you are better off without
this person in your life. If THIS is the way they think is appropriate to end a
relationship, imagine how they would handle life's other challenges. Not well,
we're guessing. Time for you to bounce back and move forward to someone who
deserves you and your love.
10 Worst Ways to Break Up
A breakup is a serious, earth-shattering moment that in most cases leads to a
long road of emotional recovery. So, why did Berger think it was even REMOTELY
OK to break up with Carrie Bradshaw... on a Post-It? Guess what Berger - it
wasn't. And it's still not.
Before we get to our Top 10, let's acknowledge first that there are serious
long-term marriages and relationships that end horribly, with lying, infidelity,
abuse, and even breaking the law and that those breaks are significantly more
intense than what we're talking about here. This list covers the ways to break
up with someone that movies are made of, the ones that you can pass along to
friends with the "can you believe!!!???" disclaimer, and the ones that
hopefully, someday, you'll look back on and laugh about.
We asked our BounceBack members, who have been through some of the worst
breakups and divorces we've ever seen, to tell us the worst ways they've been
left to pick up the pieces and move on.
Some stories are hilarious, some crazy, some embarrassing, and some, truly
unbelievable. We've forgone some of the specifics and categorized everything we
heard into the 10 worst ways. From what was said to where it went down, this is
probably only the tip of the iceberg - so let us know your worst breakup story!
The 10 Worst Ways to Break Up With Someone
10. ON VACATION: Who would you most likely want to be stuck on a deserted island
with? Not someone who's just told you "it's not working out," we're quite sure.
Not only have you now wasted your time and money, but you can't leave the
situation easily without added plane fares and stress. If this happens to you,
break away and turn your trip into a rejuvenating self-improvement retreat...
you'll need it.
9. IN A TEXT MESSAGE: Ah, the text. The modern-day version of the Post-It. Too
wussy to do it in person? Text away, wuss.
8. ON FACEBOOK: Nothing like logging on to find your loved one tagged in a
compromising photo with a complete stranger...to you, at least. Why this is
called the "World Wide Web" and some people can't figure out how they got busted
is beyond us. Besides, it's way too trendy these days - be original, people!
7. AROUND THE FAMILY: Don't make it a family affair - you'll seriously regret
it. Whether at a sibling's wedding (see #6), a family vacation (see #10), or
meeting the family for the first time (really!?), this one is clearly ridden
with minefields that will lead to nothing but trouble. If this happens to you,
at least you've got your "people" nearby to protect you, support you, and
promptly kick your brand-new-ex to the curb.
6. AT A WEDDING: The wedding. The defining moment for any couple. The pinnacle
of celebrating relationships and love. The day they'll remember as the best day
of their lives. Forever. Guess the pressure got to you, huh?
5. AT YOUR "SPECIAL PLACE": That restaurant where we had our first date...the
bar where you told me you loved me...the bench in the park where we'd sit every
Sunday... Why on earth would anyone think this is a good idea? Let the special
place stay special. Just like there are other fish in the sea, there are other
places in the whole world. If they can't find another place, you should
definitely find another fish.
4. IN BED: Come again? Talk about ruining the mood. At least wait until you're
clothed. This one is so embarrassing that we're having visions of the recurring
dream where you're on stage in front of everyone you know in nothing but your
underwear. Except you're not even wearing underwear.
3. ON VALENTINE'S DAY: There are 365 days in the year, and ONE dedicated to
celebrating love. It's not like you can't claim you didn't "know" it was
Valentine's Day - the stores, the ads, the cards have been in your face for
weeks. Pick another day. It's that simple. Don't ruin this day forever for
someone, unless you're really in need of some bad karma. (New Year's Eve and
Birthdays received honorable mentions.)
2. BY DOING NOTHING: It was tough not giving this the Number 1 honor, and we're
still not sure. Being forced to figure something out by yourself is sometimes
the hardest and most humiliating thing of all. Coming home to find your love
gone, with no note, no calls, no anything may just be the worst way to handle a
breakup. It is definitely the WIMPIEST. Just remember that. You do this, you are
weak.
1. BY CHEATING: Sadly, this is the most common response we received - and the
stories ran the gamut, from the one-night-stand, to the ongoing affair, to the
ongoing affair that you only found out about via "the new person," to the
unspeakable announcement that your boyfriend or girlfriend is engaged to someone
else (WHAT?!?). To these we simply say, come ON. Just break it off before you
cheat. You won't hurt our feelings, we promise.
The bottom line to all of this?
If this happened to you, we can 100% guarantee that you are better off without
this person in your life. If THIS is the way they think is appropriate to end a
relationship, imagine how they would handle life's other challenges. Not well,
we're guessing. Time for you to bounce back and move forward to someone who
deserves you and your love.
Tina Ambani’s niece battered for dowry
July 7, 2010
Businessman husband picked up from international airport in a dramatic swoop
The niece of one of India’s wealthiest women filed a complaint of dowry-related battery and assault with the Gamdevi police last week.
While it is not clear what the immediate trigger was, Mana Chatterjee, 39, daughter of Tina Ambani’s elder sister, Jagruti, told the cops that she was unable to take the beatings and the harassment any longer and therefore reached out for help from the police. What emerged was a horrifying story of thirteen long years of domestic abuse.
Mana met and married Arup Chatterjee, 44, in Delhi on November 27, 1996, after a brief courtship. According to her complaint, that was the start of all her troubles.
She alleged that Arup wanted all the baratis to be ferried by a private airplane and also expected a Rolex, neither of which materialised.
In the complaint, Mana added that Arup often hit her after getting drunk and even tried to kill her on several occasions. She further alleged that Arup recently forced her into transferring Rs 28 lakh from Mana’s personal account.
The couple has two children of school going age.
Mana’s mother who is the fourth of Tina Ambani’s seven sisters - Tina is the youngest - also lives in south Mumbai and is in fact in a business partnership with Arup Chatterjee and her son Neil. They manufacture spare parts for automobiles.
Following Mana’s complaint, Arup was picked up from Sahar Airport in a dramatic swoop, just as he landed from a flight from Hong Kong on Monday evening by officers of the Gamdevi police station.
"We have lodged a case against Arup Chatterjee for dowry harassment and extortion. He has been arrested and we are investigating the matter," said DCP Zone II Anil Kumbhare.
Mana Chatterjee
Arup was produced in the Girgaum court on Tuesday and remanded to police custody till July 12. “The main question is why is Arup harassing Mana for money after so many years, especially since they are financially sound,” an officer from the Gamdevi Police Station said. The cops have started recoding statements of friends and family members.
Arup has been booked under sections 498 (A) (Enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman), 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation), 337 (Causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others) and 386 (Extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt).
When contacted, Mana confirmed that she had filed the complaint against her husband but declined to elaborate further. “It's a personal matter. I don't want to talk about it,” she said.
Businessman husband picked up from international airport in a dramatic swoop
The niece of one of India’s wealthiest women filed a complaint of dowry-related battery and assault with the Gamdevi police last week.
While it is not clear what the immediate trigger was, Mana Chatterjee, 39, daughter of Tina Ambani’s elder sister, Jagruti, told the cops that she was unable to take the beatings and the harassment any longer and therefore reached out for help from the police. What emerged was a horrifying story of thirteen long years of domestic abuse.
Mana met and married Arup Chatterjee, 44, in Delhi on November 27, 1996, after a brief courtship. According to her complaint, that was the start of all her troubles.
She alleged that Arup wanted all the baratis to be ferried by a private airplane and also expected a Rolex, neither of which materialised.
In the complaint, Mana added that Arup often hit her after getting drunk and even tried to kill her on several occasions. She further alleged that Arup recently forced her into transferring Rs 28 lakh from Mana’s personal account.
The couple has two children of school going age.
Mana’s mother who is the fourth of Tina Ambani’s seven sisters - Tina is the youngest - also lives in south Mumbai and is in fact in a business partnership with Arup Chatterjee and her son Neil. They manufacture spare parts for automobiles.
Following Mana’s complaint, Arup was picked up from Sahar Airport in a dramatic swoop, just as he landed from a flight from Hong Kong on Monday evening by officers of the Gamdevi police station.
"We have lodged a case against Arup Chatterjee for dowry harassment and extortion. He has been arrested and we are investigating the matter," said DCP Zone II Anil Kumbhare.
Mana Chatterjee
Arup was produced in the Girgaum court on Tuesday and remanded to police custody till July 12. “The main question is why is Arup harassing Mana for money after so many years, especially since they are financially sound,” an officer from the Gamdevi Police Station said. The cops have started recoding statements of friends and family members.
Arup has been booked under sections 498 (A) (Enticing or taking away or detaining with criminal intent a married woman), 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation), 337 (Causing hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others) and 386 (Extortion by putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt).
When contacted, Mana confirmed that she had filed the complaint against her husband but declined to elaborate further. “It's a personal matter. I don't want to talk about it,” she said.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Kavya Madhavan files for divorce
July 26, 2010
Popular Malayalam film actress Kavya Madhavan has filed petitions with the Ernakulam Family court for divorce and domestic violence, on Saturday. The actress who got married to Nishal Chandra, a Kuwait based banker, a year ago has decided to end her relationship following differences with her husband and his family.
Kavya who was originally planning to quit movies with her marriage, later returned to her parents and appeared in media with her sad stories. The actress has also filed a suit in the Ernakulam First Class Magistrate Court against her husband and in-laws under the Domestic Violence Act for causing mental stress.
After her disastrous married life Kavya recently returned to silver screen with the movie 'Pappy Appacha', with her favourite screen pair Dileep, which was a runaway success. She still has got a couple of movies as heroine, which are under various stages of production.
Kavya who was born in Nileshwaram in Kasaragod district, entered the Malayalam film industry as a child artist with 'Pookkalam Varavayi' (1991). Later she became the numero uno heroine of Mollywood creating big hits mostly with Dileep in ‘Meesa Madhavan’, ‘Runway’ and ‘Lion’. She had also been the heroine to Mammootty, Mohanlal, Prithviraj and Jayaram in a few hit movies like 'Madambi’, 'Anandhabhadram' and 'Classmates'.
Popular Malayalam film actress Kavya Madhavan has filed petitions with the Ernakulam Family court for divorce and domestic violence, on Saturday. The actress who got married to Nishal Chandra, a Kuwait based banker, a year ago has decided to end her relationship following differences with her husband and his family.
Kavya who was originally planning to quit movies with her marriage, later returned to her parents and appeared in media with her sad stories. The actress has also filed a suit in the Ernakulam First Class Magistrate Court against her husband and in-laws under the Domestic Violence Act for causing mental stress.
After her disastrous married life Kavya recently returned to silver screen with the movie 'Pappy Appacha', with her favourite screen pair Dileep, which was a runaway success. She still has got a couple of movies as heroine, which are under various stages of production.
Kavya who was born in Nileshwaram in Kasaragod district, entered the Malayalam film industry as a child artist with 'Pookkalam Varavayi' (1991). Later she became the numero uno heroine of Mollywood creating big hits mostly with Dileep in ‘Meesa Madhavan’, ‘Runway’ and ‘Lion’. She had also been the heroine to Mammootty, Mohanlal, Prithviraj and Jayaram in a few hit movies like 'Madambi’, 'Anandhabhadram' and 'Classmates'.
Woman arrested for dumping foetus in bin
July 26, 2010
The Cuffe Parade police have arrested a 22-year-old woman, who aborted her nine-month-old foetus and dumped it in a dustbin at Cuffe Parade.
Rina Munda, the accused, who works as a domestic help at Jolly Makers III, Cuffe Parade confessed to the police that she took the drastic step after her lover walked out on her.
The incident came to light after the building supervisor and some residents spotted a dead female foetus in the dustbin. Vilas Bole, police inspector of Cuffe Parade Police Station said, “Initially, she refused to accept the crime but when we told her that the DNA test would reveal the truth, she accepted her crime.”
Police said that Munda was having an affair with another servant, who was sacked by his employer few months ago. “We are yet to find out her boyfriend’s role in the crime,” an investigating police officer said.
Munda, who hails from Assam, consumed some abortion pills in the bathroom of the flat and then later dumped the foetus in the dustbin. She has been booked under Section 318 of the Indian Penal Code (Concealment of birth by secret disposal of dead body).
The Cuffe Parade police have arrested a 22-year-old woman, who aborted her nine-month-old foetus and dumped it in a dustbin at Cuffe Parade.
Rina Munda, the accused, who works as a domestic help at Jolly Makers III, Cuffe Parade confessed to the police that she took the drastic step after her lover walked out on her.
The incident came to light after the building supervisor and some residents spotted a dead female foetus in the dustbin. Vilas Bole, police inspector of Cuffe Parade Police Station said, “Initially, she refused to accept the crime but when we told her that the DNA test would reveal the truth, she accepted her crime.”
Police said that Munda was having an affair with another servant, who was sacked by his employer few months ago. “We are yet to find out her boyfriend’s role in the crime,” an investigating police officer said.
Munda, who hails from Assam, consumed some abortion pills in the bathroom of the flat and then later dumped the foetus in the dustbin. She has been booked under Section 318 of the Indian Penal Code (Concealment of birth by secret disposal of dead body).
Extra marital affair ends in suicide, but woman survives
July 24, 2010
The Lohegaon airport police has filed a case of attempted suicide against a woman who tried to kill herself and her lover on Wednesday night. She has now been sent to magisterial custody.
This 26-year-old married woman allegedly tried to commit suicide along with her lover by jumping into quarry filled with water, in Lohegaon.
The man died in this incident, but the woman, somehow survived and was later arrested by Airport police.
Sub Inspector V T Patil of Airport police station who is investigating the case said, “The man who died was identified as Vikas Pawar. The 26-year-old woman is married and has two children.
They were in love with each other since 1998 but their families did not agree to their relationship. Even after she got married, their affair ensued.
Eventually, when they couldn’t carry forth with the extra-marital status of their affair, they decided to end their lives.”
Narrating the incident, Patil, added, “On Wednesday night the woman eloped with Pawar and at around 11.30 pm they went to a quarry in Lohegaon. They both jumped into the water but the woman was trapped in the bushes.
She hung on to it all night long, while Pawar fell in the water and died. On Thursday morning some local residents found her dangling from the branches and they rescued her and handed her over to the police.”
Patil said, “Later the woman was arrested for attempted suicide, and has been remanded to magisterial attempt to commit a suicide case and she has been remanded Magisterial Custody.”
The Lohegaon airport police has filed a case of attempted suicide against a woman who tried to kill herself and her lover on Wednesday night. She has now been sent to magisterial custody.
This 26-year-old married woman allegedly tried to commit suicide along with her lover by jumping into quarry filled with water, in Lohegaon.
The man died in this incident, but the woman, somehow survived and was later arrested by Airport police.
Sub Inspector V T Patil of Airport police station who is investigating the case said, “The man who died was identified as Vikas Pawar. The 26-year-old woman is married and has two children.
They were in love with each other since 1998 but their families did not agree to their relationship. Even after she got married, their affair ensued.
Eventually, when they couldn’t carry forth with the extra-marital status of their affair, they decided to end their lives.”
Narrating the incident, Patil, added, “On Wednesday night the woman eloped with Pawar and at around 11.30 pm they went to a quarry in Lohegaon. They both jumped into the water but the woman was trapped in the bushes.
She hung on to it all night long, while Pawar fell in the water and died. On Thursday morning some local residents found her dangling from the branches and they rescued her and handed her over to the police.”
Patil said, “Later the woman was arrested for attempted suicide, and has been remanded to magisterial attempt to commit a suicide case and she has been remanded Magisterial Custody.”
Another Misuse Judgement-Punish Dowry Givers!!!
IN THE COURT OF ASJ-II, NORTH WEST DISTT. ROHINI: DELHI
Uma Devi
W/o Sh. Sunil Garg,
D/o Sh. Jai Kumar,
R/o C-451/9, Chandra Quarters,
Rampura, Delhi-35.
Presently residing at
T/367/29, Onkar Nagar-B,
Tri Nagar, Delhi-35.
VERSUS
1. Sunil Garg
S/o Sh. S. C. Garg,
R/o 30, Rajdhani Enclave,
Pitampura, Delhi-34.
Address given in the complaint
E-1/21, Phase-I,
Budh Vihar, Delhi.
2. The State (NCT of Delhi)
Date of institution : 24.12.2009
Arguments heard on : 13.05.2010
Date of final order : 02.06.2010
O R D E R
This revision petition has been preferred by the revisionist/ petitioner Uma Devi the estranged wife of the respondent no.1, against the order of Ld. MM dated 21.10.2009 by way of which Ld. MM directed the SHO PS Maurya Enclave to conduct investigation on the allegations made in the complaint as they attracted the commission of cognizable offence under Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
The facts leading to the filing of the revision are briefly stated as under:
A complaint was made by the petitioner/ revisionist regarding harassment by the respondent and his family on account of dowry demand, on the basis of which FIR No. 218/09 was registered at Police Station Keshavpuram. In the said complaint it was alleged by the petitioner/ revisionist that she was married to respondent no.1 on 21.4.2008 according to Hindu Rites and ceremonies at Shubham Vatika, Mundka, Delhi. As per the allegations prior to the marriage Roka ceremony had taken place on 28.1.2008 and God-Bharai ceremony was conducted on 15.4.2008 at Meri-Maker Banquet Hall, Wazirpur, Delhi and during the Roka and God-Bharai ceremonies the father of respondent no.1 had spoken to her father regarding the expenses to be incurred on the marriage and had demanded that Rs.15 to 16 lacs should be spent on the marriage and 25% to 30 % more was to be spent on the amount settled. It is also alleged by the petitioner/ present revisionist that after the marriage she was being harassed on account of insufficient dowry and demands were made by her inlaws on account of which a detail complaint was filed by the revisionist with the CAW Cell on 16.1.2009, which was after the almost 8 to 9 months of marriage. It was further alleged that respondent no.1 and his parents are influential people and despite her complaint, except registration of the FIR No. 218/09 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC PS Keshavpuram, neither any dowry articles have been returned nor any arrest has been made.
After the registration of the above FIR the respondent no.1 who is the husband of the petitioner filed a complaint under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the Ld. MM alleging that the complaint of the present petitioner itself reflected that offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 have been committed. It was alleged by the respondent no.1 that since the petitioner before this court has already alleged in her complaint on the basis of which the FIR was registered, that pursuant to the demand by the family of the respondent, the father of the petitioner fulfilled their demands.
The Ld. MM taking into account the aforesaid directed the investigations and now being aggrieved by the same the petitioner has approached this court alleging that in the complaint filed by the respondent u/s 156 (3) Cr. P.C, he had intentionally given wrong address as L-425, Shakarpur Colony, New Delhi-34 whereas he is in-fact residing with his parents at 30, Rajdhani Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi and now in the complaint on the basis of which the impugned order has been passed, he has given another false address i.e. E-1/21, Phase-I, Budh Vihar, Delhi.
The Revisionist has also assailed the order of Ld. MM on the ground that it is against the law and facts. It is pleaded that the revisionist was residing earlier at Rampura, and now at Onkar Nagar, Tri Nagar and the petitioner after her marriage had resided with respondent no. 1 and her in-laws at 30, Rajdhani Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi and no incident has happened within the jurisdiction of PS Maurya Enclave and the respondent no.1 has intentionally mentioned the police station Maurya Enclave in his complaint and the order passed on the said complaint is having no territorial jurisdiction. It is alleged that the impugned order has been passed on the basis of the false facts as a counter blast and as such is liable to he set aside. It is pleaded that the respondent no.1 and his relatives have been causing mental and physical harassment to her in respect of which FIR No.218/09 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC PS Keshav Puram has been registered. It is further pleaded that the offences for which directions have been given are not made out against her and her relations and as such the impugned order may be set aside as no specialized investigation is required to prove the allegations for commission of an offence under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Notice was issued to the respondents but no reply has been filed. The trial court record has been called which I have duly perused. I have also gone through the written synopsis of arguments filed on behalf of the revisionist and the authorities relied upon by the parties, which are as under:
1. Sabir Vs. Jaswant and Others (2003) Vol. (1) RCR (Criminal) 479.
2. Ajai Malviya Vs. State of U.P. and Others, 2001 (Vol. I) RCR (Criminal) 83.
3. Pawan Verma Vs. SHO PS Model Town & Ors.2009 (Vol. 2) JCC 1000, Delhi High Court.
4. Kalia Prem Rattan Vs. State of Punjab, 2000 (Vol.1), RCR (Criminal) 769 (Punjab & Haryana High Court).
5. Trisuns Chemicals Industry Vs. Rajesh Aggarwal and Others, (1999) Vol. 8, SCC, 686.
6. Smt. Neera Singh Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. 138 (2007), DLT-152, I (2007) DMC 545.
7. Suresh Chand Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2001, AIR, SCW 189.
Before proceeding further to decide the present revision on merits, it is necessary to observe that the order of Ld. Magistrate directing the police to investigate on the basis of the allegations made in a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. can always be challenged in revision and therefore, the present revision petition is maintainable against the order of the Ld. MM.
The first challenge to the impugned order is on the ground of territorial jurisdiction of the Ld. MM to entertain the complaint. In this regard it may be observed that the present revision is the outcome of the order passed by the Ld. MM dated 21.10.2009 on a complaint under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent. On that aspect it is necessary to observe that provisions of Sections 190, 193, 179, 177 Cr. PC, are very clear. The arguments that the Ld. Magistrate taking cognizance should have the territorial jurisdiction to try the case as well, is on the face of it erroneous. The provisions of Section 177 and Section 179 Cr.PC do not restrict the power of any court of Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence and the only restriction contained in Section 190 Cr. PC is that the power to take cognizance is subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Any Metropolitan Magistrate has the power to take cognizance of any offence, no matter whether the offence has been committed within his territorial jurisdiction or not. There is nothing in Chapter-IV of the Code of Criminal Procedure to impair the power of Metropolitan Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence on the strength of any territorial jurisdiction. The aspect of territorial jurisdiction would become relevant only when the question of inquiry or trial arises. Therefore, under these circumstances, I hereby hold that the Ld. Trial Court being the Metropolitan Magistrate, has power to take cognizance of the offence even if the offence was not committed within his territorial jurisdiction. The aspect of territorial jurisdiction becomes relevant only after during the post cognizance stage.
Before proceeding further to discuss the validity of the impugned order on merits, it is necessary to discuss the existing statutory law. Dowry Prohibition Act, is a welfare legislation which aims at curtailing and abolishing the vice of dowry. Whenever the valuable security has been given as a consideration for marriage or for continuation of marriage for a good and happy relationship, then under such circumstances an act of giving or taking of valuable securities are both covered by the Act. (Ref.: Inder Sen Vs. Sinte, 1988, Criminal Law Journal, 1116). Dowry is a two way traffic and unless there is a giver there can be no taker and it is for this reason that in order to eliminate this evil both the giver and taker have been made liable (Under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act) apart from the fact that even demand for dowry made is punishable (Under Section 4 of the Act). In a case where it is evident that there was a demand of dowry even before the marriage and pursuant to such demand, dowry was given as consideration of marriage, all persons making such demand for dowry and those giving valuable security as a consideration for marriage or for its continuance as well as those receiving this valuable security would be guilty under this Act. It is not possible to leave one and book another. Therefore, it is only that interpretation which is in-consonance with the object sought to be attained by the act that has to be adopted and nothing else would suffice.
Numerous social welfare legislations have been enacted in favour of women and Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is one such legislation denouncing traditions and customary practices derogatory to women. It is unfortunate that this legislation has been reduced to a mere paper tiger and what is more unfortunate is the fact that it is none else but the family of the women (involved in the marriage) who is responsible for non accomplishment of this legislation. Dowry is shamelessly demanded, given and received under the pretext of social compulsions. It is time that this Social Welfare legislation (Dowry Prohibition Act) is ruthlessly implemented and none is permitted to take the shield of social compulsions. This has become all the more necessary in order to check the misuse and abuse of Special Laws.
It has been observed that a large number of customary gifts are exchanged at the time of marriage. These gifts fall outside the purview of dowry in case if they are Istridhan and find a mention in the list prepared and signed by both the parties (the family of the girl and boy) as required under the Dowry Prohibition Rules. However, expensive gifts given to relatives which do not fall within the definition of Istridhan are taxable in the hands of the recipient, in case if the value of the gift which would be a transfer for inadequate consideration exceeds the statutory limit as provided under the Income Tax Act. Also, in case of gift of any immovable property, the same would require a compulsory registration. It is, therefore, necessary for the courts of law to ensure that due inquiry and investigations are got conducted not only with regard to the source of income of the person giving dowry but also as to whether these transactions are duly reflected in the Wealth Tax returns of both the Donor and the Donee. Further, in case if it is established that expensive gifts (i.e. transfer for inadequate consideration) were given to relatives (beyond the stipulated limit), the competent authority be informed so as to ensure a proper fiscal benefit to the government by way of tax from recipient of such a gift.
Coming now to the ground raised by the Revisionist that the order of the Ld. MM is against the law and facts. I may observe that the case of the present petitioner is that there was a demand of dowry by the respondent no.1 and his family even prior to her marriage. It is evident from the pleadings of the petitioner and even in her revision petition before this court she has alleged that there were discussions between her father and father of the respondent no.1 between the roka and godbharai ceremonies, wherein certain demands were made. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations FIR No.218/09 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC, PS Keshav Puram has already been registered on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner against respondent no.1 and his family, which is under investigation. While the said investigations were pending, the respondent against whom allegations have been made by the petitioner in the main FIR, approached the court in the complaint under Section 156 (3) for proceedings against the present petitioner and her family for the various offences committed by him under the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Ld. MM vide the impugned order dated 21.10.09 directed the SHO concerned to carry out investigation into the allegations made which disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence.
In the present case, on the basis of the complaint given by the present petitioner, an FIR bearing No. 218/09, PS Keshav Puram had already been registered. Another complaint has now been given by the accused husband of petitioner for registration of counter FIR against the family of the petitioner who are alleged to have given dowry pursuant to the demand raised by the family of the husband even before the marriage. This being so, it is not possible for the Ld. Magistrate under the given circumstances to make inquiries with regard to the correctness of the allegations regarding giving or taking of dowry which can only be got inquired into and investigated by the investigating agency which is already investigating the complaint given by the present petitioner alleging harassment on account of insufficient dowry on the basis of which the FIR has been already registered.
Directions of the High Court are the laws declared binding all subordinate courts. While dealing with a similar case Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.N. Dhingra of the Delhi High Court has in the case of Smt. Neera Singh Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. 138 (2007), DLT-152, I (2007) DMC 545, observed that Section 3 of the Act lays down a punishment for giving and taking dowry and therefore not only is it necessary for the courts to insist upon the compliance of the rules framed under the Act and draw adverse inference where these rules are not followed, but also to ensure that due inquiry and investigations are got conducted in all such cases which come before it with allegations of demand of dowry……. Whenever it is noticed that unaccounted cash amounts or expensive gifts are given at the time of marriage as consideration there of, then it is necessary for the courts of the Ld. Magistrates to bring these facts to the notice of the government authorities including the Income Tax authority so that not only the sources of the income of the person allegedly giving dowry but also the correctness of the allegations with regard to giving dowry are got verified and both the giver and the taker are brought to law. This being so, all subordinate courts are bound by the aforesaid directions and are under an obligation to get an inquiry conducted and bring these facts to the notice of the Government Authorities particularly the Income Tax authorities.
The incidents of misuse and abuse of special provisions of dowry harassment are increasing by the day. The already overburdened judicial system cannot permit its misuse and abuse and it has, therefore, become necessary for the courts to verify the correctness of such allegations so as to eliminate the false complaints made in this regard at its inception. In view of the aforesaid, I find no ground to intervene. The revision petition is hereby dismissed being devoid of merits. The trial court record be sent back alongwith copy of this order. Copy of this order be placed before the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to ensure strict compliance of the directions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Neera Singh Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. (Supra) while conducting investigations in cases of dowry harassment. Revision file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court
(Dr. Kamini Lau)
Uma Devi
W/o Sh. Sunil Garg,
D/o Sh. Jai Kumar,
R/o C-451/9, Chandra Quarters,
Rampura, Delhi-35.
Presently residing at
T/367/29, Onkar Nagar-B,
Tri Nagar, Delhi-35.
VERSUS
1. Sunil Garg
S/o Sh. S. C. Garg,
R/o 30, Rajdhani Enclave,
Pitampura, Delhi-34.
Address given in the complaint
E-1/21, Phase-I,
Budh Vihar, Delhi.
2. The State (NCT of Delhi)
Date of institution : 24.12.2009
Arguments heard on : 13.05.2010
Date of final order : 02.06.2010
O R D E R
This revision petition has been preferred by the revisionist/ petitioner Uma Devi the estranged wife of the respondent no.1, against the order of Ld. MM dated 21.10.2009 by way of which Ld. MM directed the SHO PS Maurya Enclave to conduct investigation on the allegations made in the complaint as they attracted the commission of cognizable offence under Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
The facts leading to the filing of the revision are briefly stated as under:
A complaint was made by the petitioner/ revisionist regarding harassment by the respondent and his family on account of dowry demand, on the basis of which FIR No. 218/09 was registered at Police Station Keshavpuram. In the said complaint it was alleged by the petitioner/ revisionist that she was married to respondent no.1 on 21.4.2008 according to Hindu Rites and ceremonies at Shubham Vatika, Mundka, Delhi. As per the allegations prior to the marriage Roka ceremony had taken place on 28.1.2008 and God-Bharai ceremony was conducted on 15.4.2008 at Meri-Maker Banquet Hall, Wazirpur, Delhi and during the Roka and God-Bharai ceremonies the father of respondent no.1 had spoken to her father regarding the expenses to be incurred on the marriage and had demanded that Rs.15 to 16 lacs should be spent on the marriage and 25% to 30 % more was to be spent on the amount settled. It is also alleged by the petitioner/ present revisionist that after the marriage she was being harassed on account of insufficient dowry and demands were made by her inlaws on account of which a detail complaint was filed by the revisionist with the CAW Cell on 16.1.2009, which was after the almost 8 to 9 months of marriage. It was further alleged that respondent no.1 and his parents are influential people and despite her complaint, except registration of the FIR No. 218/09 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC PS Keshavpuram, neither any dowry articles have been returned nor any arrest has been made.
After the registration of the above FIR the respondent no.1 who is the husband of the petitioner filed a complaint under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the Ld. MM alleging that the complaint of the present petitioner itself reflected that offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 have been committed. It was alleged by the respondent no.1 that since the petitioner before this court has already alleged in her complaint on the basis of which the FIR was registered, that pursuant to the demand by the family of the respondent, the father of the petitioner fulfilled their demands.
The Ld. MM taking into account the aforesaid directed the investigations and now being aggrieved by the same the petitioner has approached this court alleging that in the complaint filed by the respondent u/s 156 (3) Cr. P.C, he had intentionally given wrong address as L-425, Shakarpur Colony, New Delhi-34 whereas he is in-fact residing with his parents at 30, Rajdhani Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi and now in the complaint on the basis of which the impugned order has been passed, he has given another false address i.e. E-1/21, Phase-I, Budh Vihar, Delhi.
The Revisionist has also assailed the order of Ld. MM on the ground that it is against the law and facts. It is pleaded that the revisionist was residing earlier at Rampura, and now at Onkar Nagar, Tri Nagar and the petitioner after her marriage had resided with respondent no. 1 and her in-laws at 30, Rajdhani Enclave, Pitampura, Delhi and no incident has happened within the jurisdiction of PS Maurya Enclave and the respondent no.1 has intentionally mentioned the police station Maurya Enclave in his complaint and the order passed on the said complaint is having no territorial jurisdiction. It is alleged that the impugned order has been passed on the basis of the false facts as a counter blast and as such is liable to he set aside. It is pleaded that the respondent no.1 and his relatives have been causing mental and physical harassment to her in respect of which FIR No.218/09 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC PS Keshav Puram has been registered. It is further pleaded that the offences for which directions have been given are not made out against her and her relations and as such the impugned order may be set aside as no specialized investigation is required to prove the allegations for commission of an offence under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Notice was issued to the respondents but no reply has been filed. The trial court record has been called which I have duly perused. I have also gone through the written synopsis of arguments filed on behalf of the revisionist and the authorities relied upon by the parties, which are as under:
1. Sabir Vs. Jaswant and Others (2003) Vol. (1) RCR (Criminal) 479.
2. Ajai Malviya Vs. State of U.P. and Others, 2001 (Vol. I) RCR (Criminal) 83.
3. Pawan Verma Vs. SHO PS Model Town & Ors.2009 (Vol. 2) JCC 1000, Delhi High Court.
4. Kalia Prem Rattan Vs. State of Punjab, 2000 (Vol.1), RCR (Criminal) 769 (Punjab & Haryana High Court).
5. Trisuns Chemicals Industry Vs. Rajesh Aggarwal and Others, (1999) Vol. 8, SCC, 686.
6. Smt. Neera Singh Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. 138 (2007), DLT-152, I (2007) DMC 545.
7. Suresh Chand Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2001, AIR, SCW 189.
Before proceeding further to decide the present revision on merits, it is necessary to observe that the order of Ld. Magistrate directing the police to investigate on the basis of the allegations made in a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. can always be challenged in revision and therefore, the present revision petition is maintainable against the order of the Ld. MM.
The first challenge to the impugned order is on the ground of territorial jurisdiction of the Ld. MM to entertain the complaint. In this regard it may be observed that the present revision is the outcome of the order passed by the Ld. MM dated 21.10.2009 on a complaint under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent. On that aspect it is necessary to observe that provisions of Sections 190, 193, 179, 177 Cr. PC, are very clear. The arguments that the Ld. Magistrate taking cognizance should have the territorial jurisdiction to try the case as well, is on the face of it erroneous. The provisions of Section 177 and Section 179 Cr.PC do not restrict the power of any court of Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence and the only restriction contained in Section 190 Cr. PC is that the power to take cognizance is subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Any Metropolitan Magistrate has the power to take cognizance of any offence, no matter whether the offence has been committed within his territorial jurisdiction or not. There is nothing in Chapter-IV of the Code of Criminal Procedure to impair the power of Metropolitan Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence on the strength of any territorial jurisdiction. The aspect of territorial jurisdiction would become relevant only when the question of inquiry or trial arises. Therefore, under these circumstances, I hereby hold that the Ld. Trial Court being the Metropolitan Magistrate, has power to take cognizance of the offence even if the offence was not committed within his territorial jurisdiction. The aspect of territorial jurisdiction becomes relevant only after during the post cognizance stage.
Before proceeding further to discuss the validity of the impugned order on merits, it is necessary to discuss the existing statutory law. Dowry Prohibition Act, is a welfare legislation which aims at curtailing and abolishing the vice of dowry. Whenever the valuable security has been given as a consideration for marriage or for continuation of marriage for a good and happy relationship, then under such circumstances an act of giving or taking of valuable securities are both covered by the Act. (Ref.: Inder Sen Vs. Sinte, 1988, Criminal Law Journal, 1116). Dowry is a two way traffic and unless there is a giver there can be no taker and it is for this reason that in order to eliminate this evil both the giver and taker have been made liable (Under Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act) apart from the fact that even demand for dowry made is punishable (Under Section 4 of the Act). In a case where it is evident that there was a demand of dowry even before the marriage and pursuant to such demand, dowry was given as consideration of marriage, all persons making such demand for dowry and those giving valuable security as a consideration for marriage or for its continuance as well as those receiving this valuable security would be guilty under this Act. It is not possible to leave one and book another. Therefore, it is only that interpretation which is in-consonance with the object sought to be attained by the act that has to be adopted and nothing else would suffice.
Numerous social welfare legislations have been enacted in favour of women and Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 is one such legislation denouncing traditions and customary practices derogatory to women. It is unfortunate that this legislation has been reduced to a mere paper tiger and what is more unfortunate is the fact that it is none else but the family of the women (involved in the marriage) who is responsible for non accomplishment of this legislation. Dowry is shamelessly demanded, given and received under the pretext of social compulsions. It is time that this Social Welfare legislation (Dowry Prohibition Act) is ruthlessly implemented and none is permitted to take the shield of social compulsions. This has become all the more necessary in order to check the misuse and abuse of Special Laws.
It has been observed that a large number of customary gifts are exchanged at the time of marriage. These gifts fall outside the purview of dowry in case if they are Istridhan and find a mention in the list prepared and signed by both the parties (the family of the girl and boy) as required under the Dowry Prohibition Rules. However, expensive gifts given to relatives which do not fall within the definition of Istridhan are taxable in the hands of the recipient, in case if the value of the gift which would be a transfer for inadequate consideration exceeds the statutory limit as provided under the Income Tax Act. Also, in case of gift of any immovable property, the same would require a compulsory registration. It is, therefore, necessary for the courts of law to ensure that due inquiry and investigations are got conducted not only with regard to the source of income of the person giving dowry but also as to whether these transactions are duly reflected in the Wealth Tax returns of both the Donor and the Donee. Further, in case if it is established that expensive gifts (i.e. transfer for inadequate consideration) were given to relatives (beyond the stipulated limit), the competent authority be informed so as to ensure a proper fiscal benefit to the government by way of tax from recipient of such a gift.
Coming now to the ground raised by the Revisionist that the order of the Ld. MM is against the law and facts. I may observe that the case of the present petitioner is that there was a demand of dowry by the respondent no.1 and his family even prior to her marriage. It is evident from the pleadings of the petitioner and even in her revision petition before this court she has alleged that there were discussions between her father and father of the respondent no.1 between the roka and godbharai ceremonies, wherein certain demands were made. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations FIR No.218/09 under Section 498A/406/34 IPC, PS Keshav Puram has already been registered on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner against respondent no.1 and his family, which is under investigation. While the said investigations were pending, the respondent against whom allegations have been made by the petitioner in the main FIR, approached the court in the complaint under Section 156 (3) for proceedings against the present petitioner and her family for the various offences committed by him under the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Ld. MM vide the impugned order dated 21.10.09 directed the SHO concerned to carry out investigation into the allegations made which disclosed the commission of a cognizable offence.
In the present case, on the basis of the complaint given by the present petitioner, an FIR bearing No. 218/09, PS Keshav Puram had already been registered. Another complaint has now been given by the accused husband of petitioner for registration of counter FIR against the family of the petitioner who are alleged to have given dowry pursuant to the demand raised by the family of the husband even before the marriage. This being so, it is not possible for the Ld. Magistrate under the given circumstances to make inquiries with regard to the correctness of the allegations regarding giving or taking of dowry which can only be got inquired into and investigated by the investigating agency which is already investigating the complaint given by the present petitioner alleging harassment on account of insufficient dowry on the basis of which the FIR has been already registered.
Directions of the High Court are the laws declared binding all subordinate courts. While dealing with a similar case Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.N. Dhingra of the Delhi High Court has in the case of Smt. Neera Singh Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. 138 (2007), DLT-152, I (2007) DMC 545, observed that Section 3 of the Act lays down a punishment for giving and taking dowry and therefore not only is it necessary for the courts to insist upon the compliance of the rules framed under the Act and draw adverse inference where these rules are not followed, but also to ensure that due inquiry and investigations are got conducted in all such cases which come before it with allegations of demand of dowry……. Whenever it is noticed that unaccounted cash amounts or expensive gifts are given at the time of marriage as consideration there of, then it is necessary for the courts of the Ld. Magistrates to bring these facts to the notice of the government authorities including the Income Tax authority so that not only the sources of the income of the person allegedly giving dowry but also the correctness of the allegations with regard to giving dowry are got verified and both the giver and the taker are brought to law. This being so, all subordinate courts are bound by the aforesaid directions and are under an obligation to get an inquiry conducted and bring these facts to the notice of the Government Authorities particularly the Income Tax authorities.
The incidents of misuse and abuse of special provisions of dowry harassment are increasing by the day. The already overburdened judicial system cannot permit its misuse and abuse and it has, therefore, become necessary for the courts to verify the correctness of such allegations so as to eliminate the false complaints made in this regard at its inception. In view of the aforesaid, I find no ground to intervene. The revision petition is hereby dismissed being devoid of merits. The trial court record be sent back alongwith copy of this order. Copy of this order be placed before the Commissioner of Police, Delhi to ensure strict compliance of the directions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Neera Singh Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. (Supra) while conducting investigations in cases of dowry harassment. Revision file be consigned to Record Room.
Announced in the open court
(Dr. Kamini Lau)
‘They killed my father’
July 25, 2010
Lawyer Amit Bhandari blames his wife, in-laws and the cops after his father died of a heart attack. Amit claims it was brought on by a police search of his house
Amit Bhandari (32), a lawyer working with the NEO group in Bangalore alleges that his father Pradeep (60) died due to a heart attack caused by anxiety when a team of Delhi police searched his house in Wanowrie on June 17. Bhandari also alleges that the Pune police are refusing to act on his complaint.
Amit’s wife Deeksha had filed a case of harassment and criminal breach of trust against Amit, Pradeep, Amit’s mother Adarsh, his brother Kapil and sister Shobha. The search was carried out on the basis of this complaint.
Amit blames Deeksha, her father Ramesh, mother Meenakshi, Inspector Prem Pal of Delhi police and Assistant sub inspector Krishna from Delhi police for Pradeep’s death and demands they be booked for murder and criminal conspiracy or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
However, Ramesh Sethi said, “We are not aware of the death of Amit’s father. We had filed a case against the Bhandaris for harassing Deeksha.”
The case
Amit and Deeksha got married on June 27, 2009, at New Delhi which is Deeksha’s hometown. Amit claims they then went to live in Banglore .
Amit alleges, “Two months after the marriage, Deeksha went to Delhi. Afterwards, she refused to talk to me over the phone. A month after that, the Crime Against Women Cell (CAW) of Delhi police summoned us. My parents and I went to Delhi where a counselling session took place. After three such sessions, Deeksha filed a case of harassment.”
He continues, “I preferred anticipatory bail application in courts in Bangalore and Delhi. The court in Delhi gave us interim anticipatory bail till May 12 and asked the police to intimate us a week in advance in case we were to be arrested.
But on June 17 Deeksha barged inside the house with the police team. For 90 minutes, my father pleaded that we were innocent. He showed them the Delhi court’s orders.
The police told him the order did not bear any significance. Then my father fell unconscious and we had to call a doctor. On the doctor’s advice, he was shifted to Ruby Hall Clinic. He died on June 1.”
Amit concludes, “My father suffered the heart attack because he felt humiliated. After my father died, I complained to the Wanowrie police, butthey haven’t filed any formal case yet.”
We only did our duty: delhi cops
ASI Krishna said, “We only did our duty. We intimated the Bhandaris about the date on which we were to search their house in Pune. They allege they were not intimated.”
Amit should approach the court: Pune police
Inspector in-charge of Wanowrie police station Shivajirao Kanase said, “The Delhi police had sought our help to conduct the search and we had sent our men with them. We have no evidence that Amit’s father died due to the search. We asked him to approach the court. If the court asks us to investigate, we will do so.”
Lawyer Amit Bhandari blames his wife, in-laws and the cops after his father died of a heart attack. Amit claims it was brought on by a police search of his house
Amit Bhandari (32), a lawyer working with the NEO group in Bangalore alleges that his father Pradeep (60) died due to a heart attack caused by anxiety when a team of Delhi police searched his house in Wanowrie on June 17. Bhandari also alleges that the Pune police are refusing to act on his complaint.
Amit’s wife Deeksha had filed a case of harassment and criminal breach of trust against Amit, Pradeep, Amit’s mother Adarsh, his brother Kapil and sister Shobha. The search was carried out on the basis of this complaint.
Amit blames Deeksha, her father Ramesh, mother Meenakshi, Inspector Prem Pal of Delhi police and Assistant sub inspector Krishna from Delhi police for Pradeep’s death and demands they be booked for murder and criminal conspiracy or culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
However, Ramesh Sethi said, “We are not aware of the death of Amit’s father. We had filed a case against the Bhandaris for harassing Deeksha.”
The case
Amit and Deeksha got married on June 27, 2009, at New Delhi which is Deeksha’s hometown. Amit claims they then went to live in Banglore .
Amit alleges, “Two months after the marriage, Deeksha went to Delhi. Afterwards, she refused to talk to me over the phone. A month after that, the Crime Against Women Cell (CAW) of Delhi police summoned us. My parents and I went to Delhi where a counselling session took place. After three such sessions, Deeksha filed a case of harassment.”
He continues, “I preferred anticipatory bail application in courts in Bangalore and Delhi. The court in Delhi gave us interim anticipatory bail till May 12 and asked the police to intimate us a week in advance in case we were to be arrested.
But on June 17 Deeksha barged inside the house with the police team. For 90 minutes, my father pleaded that we were innocent. He showed them the Delhi court’s orders.
The police told him the order did not bear any significance. Then my father fell unconscious and we had to call a doctor. On the doctor’s advice, he was shifted to Ruby Hall Clinic. He died on June 1.”
Amit concludes, “My father suffered the heart attack because he felt humiliated. After my father died, I complained to the Wanowrie police, butthey haven’t filed any formal case yet.”
We only did our duty: delhi cops
ASI Krishna said, “We only did our duty. We intimated the Bhandaris about the date on which we were to search their house in Pune. They allege they were not intimated.”
Amit should approach the court: Pune police
Inspector in-charge of Wanowrie police station Shivajirao Kanase said, “The Delhi police had sought our help to conduct the search and we had sent our men with them. We have no evidence that Amit’s father died due to the search. We asked him to approach the court. If the court asks us to investigate, we will do so.”
Pay up if you're caught lying, says NCW
July 24, 2010
LIES and THE LAW: The National Commission for Women wants the Law Ministry to ensure that a strict penalty is imposed in cases where it is found that false allegations of adultery have been levelled against the wife.
Men fighting bitter divorce cases in courts sometimes stoop to levelling false allegations of adultery against their wives in order to avoid paying maintenance. In order to shield women from such vilification, the National Commission for Women (NCW) is all set to recommend strict penalty against a man who levels false allegations of adultery against his wife.
The NCW has held two rounds of consultations with the National Law School, Bangalore on its proposal to amend Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPc) and is in the process of preparing draft recommendations.
Know your rights
Section 125, which deals with order for maintenance of wives, children and parents, states: “No wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance from her husband under this Section if she is living in adultery, or, if without any sufficient reason, she refuses to live with her husband, or if they are living separately by mutual consent.” At the same time, the Section clarifies that “if a husband has contracted marriage with another woman or keeps a mistress, it shall be considered as just ground for his wife’s refusal to live with him”.
According to NCW Chairperson Girija Vyas, “There is no denying the fact that some men level false charges of adultery against their wives. Such charges should be investigated by the court in-camera so that privacy is maintained but the true facts come out. What we would like to propose to the Law Ministry is a strict penalty in cases where it is found that false allegations of adultery have been levelled against the wife.”
Sound move, say lawyers
What does the legal community think of the NCW initiative? Atul Nagarajan, a Delhi-based advocate, is all for it. He says, “As of now, there is no specific provision in the CrPc to punish a man who is found making false charges of adultery (infidelity) against his wife. There is, however, remedy available under Section 340 and 344 of the CrPC if a false statement is made on oath or false evidence is given in any case. The NCW initiative is, therefore, welcome as matrimonial proceedings are very personal in nature and it is only in the fitness of things that such proceedings be held in-camera to encourage either party to speak his or her mind in an enabling environment.”
Many women report that their husbands want to walk out of a marriage without paying a single penny.
Too little, too late?
A young woman based in Delhi shares her story. “I did not want to live in the shadow of another woman who my husband was seeing. He engineered a situation compelling me to leave my matrimonial home and then slapped charges of desertion against me by exploiting the fact that he has a critical illness. This, even though I had stood by him for several years following the diagnosis. Today, he is living right next to the home of his new partner. It is hard for me to ask for money from a person who has never valued me. He resisted suo motu suggestions from the judge to give me a lump sum by pleading that he was in a job, in a private firm, which he was likely to lose at any point of time, although he takes home a monthly salary exceeding Rs 1,00,000. I let him go out of consideration for his illness. But it’s a shame that the man had the audacity to tell me that he would not have paid me anything in any case.”
‘Wives are not always victims’
While there are many women who can narrate stories of bitter divorce battles, Nidhi Gupta, an advocate practising in the Supreme Court, is reluctant to view all men as ‘culprits’. She feels that while there is an element of truth in what the NCW Chairperson has said, it must be remembered that the courts don’t proceed only on allegations. “The presumption is that the Court will satisfy itself that the woman is indeed living in adultery before invoking Section 125. Let us not lose sight of the fact that Section 125 is there in the statute books so that there is no harassment caused to men. Women are equally adept at making false charges if the divorce is acrimonious. I know of a couple of cases where women have taken men to the cleaners,” she says.
She also disagrees with the general perception that men are always reluctant to support their estranged wives by way of maintenance. Regarding cases where men default in payment of maintenance, as in the recent case involving actor Raghuvir Yadav, she says, “If a man is a habitual defaulter in the payment of maintenance as directed by the Court, then the wife is free to initiate contempt proceedings against the husband or seek any other suitable remedy available to her in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
There are even cases where men have volunteered to support their estranged wives. A Delhi-based writer, who parted ways with his wife in 1997, claims that he made a couple of payments of Rs 20,000 each to his wife on his own even when it was not legally binding on him to do so. Apart from that, he has been paying his wife maintenance regularly for the last 10 years. “I had the choice of making a payment of Rs 15,00,000 at one go or split it into two parts. It’s definitely a strain on my pocket as it’s not a mean sum of money but, for me, it’s like purchasing my freedom. I experience inner peace not because I am paying her money but because I have my freedom. I have paid regularly all these years. Once or twice, I had some difficulty in paying but she was quite accommodating.”
It’s not just about the money
Apart from the controversies over maintenance, there are other thorny issues that women want addressed. After the Cabinet cleared the Bill to make irretrievable breakdown of marriage as grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act, the Mumbai-based group, Majlis, has been arguing that a discussion on women’s right to matrimonial property should go alongside the discussion on irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Lawyer Flavia Agnes of Majlis says this is the only way to ensure that safeguards for women are built into the proposed law. The National Commission for Women has promised to take the issue forward. For the short term at least divorce in India will continue to be a minefield, negotiating which will demand not just resilience but a greater awareness of gender rights.
LIES and THE LAW: The National Commission for Women wants the Law Ministry to ensure that a strict penalty is imposed in cases where it is found that false allegations of adultery have been levelled against the wife.
Men fighting bitter divorce cases in courts sometimes stoop to levelling false allegations of adultery against their wives in order to avoid paying maintenance. In order to shield women from such vilification, the National Commission for Women (NCW) is all set to recommend strict penalty against a man who levels false allegations of adultery against his wife.
The NCW has held two rounds of consultations with the National Law School, Bangalore on its proposal to amend Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPc) and is in the process of preparing draft recommendations.
Know your rights
Section 125, which deals with order for maintenance of wives, children and parents, states: “No wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance from her husband under this Section if she is living in adultery, or, if without any sufficient reason, she refuses to live with her husband, or if they are living separately by mutual consent.” At the same time, the Section clarifies that “if a husband has contracted marriage with another woman or keeps a mistress, it shall be considered as just ground for his wife’s refusal to live with him”.
According to NCW Chairperson Girija Vyas, “There is no denying the fact that some men level false charges of adultery against their wives. Such charges should be investigated by the court in-camera so that privacy is maintained but the true facts come out. What we would like to propose to the Law Ministry is a strict penalty in cases where it is found that false allegations of adultery have been levelled against the wife.”
Sound move, say lawyers
What does the legal community think of the NCW initiative? Atul Nagarajan, a Delhi-based advocate, is all for it. He says, “As of now, there is no specific provision in the CrPc to punish a man who is found making false charges of adultery (infidelity) against his wife. There is, however, remedy available under Section 340 and 344 of the CrPC if a false statement is made on oath or false evidence is given in any case. The NCW initiative is, therefore, welcome as matrimonial proceedings are very personal in nature and it is only in the fitness of things that such proceedings be held in-camera to encourage either party to speak his or her mind in an enabling environment.”
Many women report that their husbands want to walk out of a marriage without paying a single penny.
Too little, too late?
A young woman based in Delhi shares her story. “I did not want to live in the shadow of another woman who my husband was seeing. He engineered a situation compelling me to leave my matrimonial home and then slapped charges of desertion against me by exploiting the fact that he has a critical illness. This, even though I had stood by him for several years following the diagnosis. Today, he is living right next to the home of his new partner. It is hard for me to ask for money from a person who has never valued me. He resisted suo motu suggestions from the judge to give me a lump sum by pleading that he was in a job, in a private firm, which he was likely to lose at any point of time, although he takes home a monthly salary exceeding Rs 1,00,000. I let him go out of consideration for his illness. But it’s a shame that the man had the audacity to tell me that he would not have paid me anything in any case.”
‘Wives are not always victims’
While there are many women who can narrate stories of bitter divorce battles, Nidhi Gupta, an advocate practising in the Supreme Court, is reluctant to view all men as ‘culprits’. She feels that while there is an element of truth in what the NCW Chairperson has said, it must be remembered that the courts don’t proceed only on allegations. “The presumption is that the Court will satisfy itself that the woman is indeed living in adultery before invoking Section 125. Let us not lose sight of the fact that Section 125 is there in the statute books so that there is no harassment caused to men. Women are equally adept at making false charges if the divorce is acrimonious. I know of a couple of cases where women have taken men to the cleaners,” she says.
She also disagrees with the general perception that men are always reluctant to support their estranged wives by way of maintenance. Regarding cases where men default in payment of maintenance, as in the recent case involving actor Raghuvir Yadav, she says, “If a man is a habitual defaulter in the payment of maintenance as directed by the Court, then the wife is free to initiate contempt proceedings against the husband or seek any other suitable remedy available to her in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
There are even cases where men have volunteered to support their estranged wives. A Delhi-based writer, who parted ways with his wife in 1997, claims that he made a couple of payments of Rs 20,000 each to his wife on his own even when it was not legally binding on him to do so. Apart from that, he has been paying his wife maintenance regularly for the last 10 years. “I had the choice of making a payment of Rs 15,00,000 at one go or split it into two parts. It’s definitely a strain on my pocket as it’s not a mean sum of money but, for me, it’s like purchasing my freedom. I experience inner peace not because I am paying her money but because I have my freedom. I have paid regularly all these years. Once or twice, I had some difficulty in paying but she was quite accommodating.”
It’s not just about the money
Apart from the controversies over maintenance, there are other thorny issues that women want addressed. After the Cabinet cleared the Bill to make irretrievable breakdown of marriage as grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act, the Mumbai-based group, Majlis, has been arguing that a discussion on women’s right to matrimonial property should go alongside the discussion on irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Lawyer Flavia Agnes of Majlis says this is the only way to ensure that safeguards for women are built into the proposed law. The National Commission for Women has promised to take the issue forward. For the short term at least divorce in India will continue to be a minefield, negotiating which will demand not just resilience but a greater awareness of gender rights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)