WAITING FOR REFORM
April 11, 2010
India’s Muslims live by legal provisions that sharply violate the spirit — and word — of the Holy Quran.
The Islamic idea of marriage is best expressed in the following Q u r a n i c verse: “It is He who created you from a single person and made his mate of like nature in order that he might dwell with her (in love). When they are united she bears a light burden and carries it about. When she grows heavy they both pray to God their Lord: ‘If You give us a goodly child we vow we shall be grateful’.” Elsewhere, the Quran says: “They are your garments and you are their garments.”
On the other hand, in Shariat (Islamic law) marriage is described as aqd (contract) and like any other contract, it requires free consent of the contracting parties. The parents or guardians may act as facilitators but the final decision rests with the man and woman who can propose their own terms and conditions to conclude the marriage.
The Quran views marriage as a source of physical and emotional comfort and a means of perpetuating mankind, so it is necessary both partners intend the bond to be for life. However, in cases where living together becomes impossible, the law permits divorce, described as “the most odious among permissible things”.
The Quran lays down the detailed procedure, which is informed by a strategy that encourages reconciliation and prevents family breakup. The Quran says: “When you do divorce women, divorce them at their prescribed periods and count (accurately) their prescribed periods, and fear God. And turn them not out of their houses nor shall they leave except in case they are guilty of some open lewdness. Those are
limits set by God: and any who transgresses the limits of God does verily wrong his soul: you know not if perchance Allah will bring about thereafter some new situation.”
The Quranic procedure of divorce provides that the couple continue to live in their matrimonial home during Iddat (the three-month cooling-off period) and the option of reunion and remarriage remains available.
In Islamic legal theory, the Quran is accorded the highest status. It is from this that Sharia laws are extracted and construed. It defies reason that Muslim family laws as practised on the Indian subcontinent are mostly in conflict with Quranic provisions.
Some of the legal provisions with respect to marriage and divorce compiled by the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) sharply violate the spirit —and word — of the Quran. On the question of parity between husband and wife, Section 117 (3) of the AIMPLB compendium differentiates between Muslims of Arab and non-Arab origin. It provides that “regard shall be had in respect of descent among the Arabs especially Quraysh and those non-Arab families who have preserved their descent. People in the rest of the non-Arab world are mutually equal”. What a travesty of Islamic egalitarianism and equality.
Similarly, in matters of divorce the compendium makes a mockery of the lofty Islamic principle of ‘no compulsion in matters of religion’. The chapter dealing with divorce not only validates instant divorce but Section 5 (b) says: “For the effectiveness of talaq (divorce) it is in principle necessary that the man pronouncing it should be in his senses. This demands that a talaq pronounced in an inebriated condition should not be effective. However if a person has unlawfully consumed an intoxicant by his own liking and habit, his talaq will become effective by way of punishment”.
Sections (6) and (7) are even more ludicrous. Section 6 says: “If a person under compulsion or duress pronounces a talaq it will be valid if it is verbal but not otherwise.” Section 7 says: “A talaq pronounced in hazl i.e. jest also becomes effective.”
There is nothing Islamic about these laws, in fact they smack of pre-Islamic Arab jahiliyya (ignorance), which thrived on class differences and the use of brute force. Is it any wonder then that many hapless women are exploited through fraudulent marriages and then shown the door with an instant divorce? It is futile to talk of reform so long as the authors of these atrocious laws continue to enjoy political patronage.
Mr.Rebates
Monday, April 12, 2010
More Hindus than Muslims have 2 wives
Even if
this is the Case, where is the solid proof of the fact that more Hindu's have 2 wifes then Muslims, the author provides no solid evidence, only retoric, and the Media swallows it?
Just look at the figures below that the author presents, for one thing he once again doesnt provide citations on where he gets this chart, for all we know he could have made them up himself. This chart is showing figures from 1961, he may as well given it from 1861. Readers are taken for fools in this case.
The Shoaib-Ayesha-Sania drama, played out live on TV for days, has enhanced the image of Ayesha and her family. The same cannot be said of the former Pakistan captain who sold himself short by denying his first marriage. But, Indians and Pakistanis alike can now heave a sigh of relief the controversy is settled. But the entire saga offers important lessons. First, although Muslim Personal Law allows a man to take a second wife during the lifetime of the first, it cannot be a license to commit injustice. Under Islamic tenets, a man is allowed to take a second wife only if he is in a position to provide equal partnership and amenities to both.
However, if you were to carry out an honest survey across the country, you would find that more Hindu men than Muslims have more than one wife. In such cases, the second wife is neither recognized by society nor given the legal status of ‘wife’.
It’s interesting to note that throughout the controversy — and despite Sania’s wholehearted support for Shoaib — the Muslim community in particular and Indian society at large was solidly behind Ayesha, who was seen as the victim in the whole saga.
Perhaps that’s why Shoaib did not succeed in his attempt to cover up his first marriage.
Also, Ayesha’s acceptance of a divorce without preconditions sends out a strong signal to the Pakistani people — the people of India are forgiving if you make amends.
But I am still intrigued about the most important aspect of this drama — the basis of the divorce. Under Islamic law, a husband has to give a reason for divorcing his wife and if she is not satisfied with it, she can ask for divorce under the khula rights. What reason did Shoaib give for divorcing Ayesha? That is still not clear.
this is the Case, where is the solid proof of the fact that more Hindu's have 2 wifes then Muslims, the author provides no solid evidence, only retoric, and the Media swallows it?
Just look at the figures below that the author presents, for one thing he once again doesnt provide citations on where he gets this chart, for all we know he could have made them up himself. This chart is showing figures from 1961, he may as well given it from 1861. Readers are taken for fools in this case.
The Shoaib-Ayesha-Sania drama, played out live on TV for days, has enhanced the image of Ayesha and her family. The same cannot be said of the former Pakistan captain who sold himself short by denying his first marriage. But, Indians and Pakistanis alike can now heave a sigh of relief the controversy is settled. But the entire saga offers important lessons. First, although Muslim Personal Law allows a man to take a second wife during the lifetime of the first, it cannot be a license to commit injustice. Under Islamic tenets, a man is allowed to take a second wife only if he is in a position to provide equal partnership and amenities to both.
However, if you were to carry out an honest survey across the country, you would find that more Hindu men than Muslims have more than one wife. In such cases, the second wife is neither recognized by society nor given the legal status of ‘wife’.
It’s interesting to note that throughout the controversy — and despite Sania’s wholehearted support for Shoaib — the Muslim community in particular and Indian society at large was solidly behind Ayesha, who was seen as the victim in the whole saga.
Perhaps that’s why Shoaib did not succeed in his attempt to cover up his first marriage.
Also, Ayesha’s acceptance of a divorce without preconditions sends out a strong signal to the Pakistani people — the people of India are forgiving if you make amends.
But I am still intrigued about the most important aspect of this drama — the basis of the divorce. Under Islamic law, a husband has to give a reason for divorcing his wife and if she is not satisfied with it, she can ask for divorce under the khula rights. What reason did Shoaib give for divorcing Ayesha? That is still not clear.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
A Tale of Two Countries
The Shoaib-Ayesha story exposes key differences in the code that governs marriage and divorce among Muslims in India and Pakistan
Mumbai: Never mind who ‘cheated’ whom in the Shoaib Malik-Ayesha Siddiqui story, the buck stops at the relevant provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Act, 1937. It has been rarely — and barely — amended in the 90 years since. This, largely because the ulema is opposed to change and regards a modern interpretation of the law as interference.
Mumbai-based scholar Asghar Ali Engineer is one of many who believe that “the cultural basis of the Muslim Personal Law actually lies in the customary laws of the Arab society”. He questions practices such as marrying and divorcing on the phone. These are not mentioned in the Muslim Personal Law and should be declared invalid, says Engineer. He laments Muslim trivialization of “marriage, meesaq-e-ghaliza (strong covenant between two adults)… a qazi can be bribed to distort the rules laid down for a valid nikah and talaq”.
The law’s most controversial elements include the triple talaq and polygamy.
TRIPLE TALAQ
Not mentioned in the Quran; an innovation. Most ulema agree that Allah considers talaq the most reprehensible of all that is allowed to man. However, they remain divided on the triple talaq. The Hanafi — one of Sunni Islam’s four schools of jurisprudence — allows the triple talaq. But this practice can lead to absurd scenarios, such as the Oriya man who informed his wife he had said ‘talaq’ three times in his dream the night before. The local maulvis promptly pronounced they were no longer man and wife. The man had to take his fight for the marriage to be restored all the way to the Supreme Court.
Other forms of divorce recognised under the Shariat Act, 1937 and applicable to all Muslims in India are: mubarra (divorce by mutual consent) and talaqe-tafweez (delegated divorce).
The subsequent Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 provided some equality as it granted Muslim women the right of khula — or the right to divorce their husbands. Its prime mover was a scholar, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, who lamented that many Muslim women were converting to Hinduism to get rid of their “cruel” husbands who would neither treat them well nor divorce them easily. While this Act is often called progressive, there have been calls for further change. Advocate Neelofar Akhtar, president of Mumbai’s Family Court Bar Association, wants urgent amendment of the 1939 Act. This would be in line with reform of other laws dealing with other communities, notably the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Special Marriage Act, 1954. Both were amended in 2001 to allow women to file divorce petitions where they live. In contrast, the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 insists a woman can file for divorce only where she was married or where her husband lives. Akhtar describes it as “a discriminatory provision”. She has raised the issue at three All-India Muslim Personal Law Board meetings, the last in Lucknow just days ago. But the mullah-dominated, patriarchal law board has stonewalled the issue. Many point out that the board tried to deny Shah Bano maintenance from the husband who had divorced her in 1978. Subsequently, Rajiv Gandhi’s government diluted the Supreme Court’s judgment that Shah Bano was entitled to alimony. Instead, the government introduced the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. It is worth noting that the new Act is the only one that is enforceable in a criminal court, rather than in family courts (as are the Personal Law Act and Dissolution of Marriage Act). The 1986 Muslim Women Act admittedly instituted some reasonable provisions such as maintenance during the Iddat period, or three months from the day of divorce. But, it denied — at one stroke — the right to alimony even to destitute divorcees. Khula, or a woman filing for divorce, has had its share of controversy. Starlet Manyata married Sanjay Dutt after she filed for a khula from then husband Meraj. But Manyata’s first husband challenged the khula she secured from a qazi in Mumbai, saying only a man could give a khula. He was plain wrong, says lawyer Neelofar Akhtar, who fought and won Manyata’s case. “If the Quran allows men the right to pronounce talaq, it also grants women the right to khula.”
POLYGAMY
A provision enshrined in the Quran, though hedged around by many conditions; upheld by the 1937 Muslim Personal Law but grossly misinterpreted and misused. Those partial to the practice quote a Quranic verse as justification but forget that it was revealed during a great and bloody battle, which left many men dead and large numbers of destitute widows and orphans. The flipside is another verse in the same Quranic chapter, which stresses that no man is ever “able to be fair and just between women even if it is your ardent desire.” Senior cleric Maulana Shoeb Koti says it “proves the Quran lays emphasis on monogamy”. India, unlike Pakistan, does not have legislation such as the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, which proscribes marrying a second time without the first wife’s consent. Supreme Court advocate Saif Mahmood admits the lacunae: “An avowedly secular country like India has failed to give Muslim women what many less secular countries have.”
Islamabad: What do Pakistan prime minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Punjab chief minister Mian Shahbaz Sharif have in common? Both are believed to have more than one wife. PPP lawmaker Nabeel Gabol recently told parliament that roughly 80% of the country’s MNAs (Members of the National Assembly) and senators were muchmarried men. This, despite Pakistan’s Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961.
Supreme Court barrister Gohar Ali says there has to be a valid reason in order for a Pakistani man to marry a second time. For instance, “suppose a woman cannot become a mother due to medical reasons”. The law requires an arbitration council, headed by a local councillor, to identify the ‘reason’, Ali adds. But nearly half a century later, polygamy is still practised by isolated tribal communities and the feudal classes, which dominate parliament.
Parliamentary sources have given TOI a list of prominent politicians and public figures with more than one wife. The list is long. It names Gilani and Sharif, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) heavyweight Makhdoom Amin Fahim, Sindh chief minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah, and former federal ministers Yar Muhammed Rindh and Azam Khan Hoti.
It is interesting to note that Samina Khawar Hayat of the PML-N supported the practice of polygamy in the Punjab assembly just a few weeks ago. It was subsequently debated in the National Assembly. Are Pakistan’s politicians soft on polygamy?
The 1961 law empowered women by giving them the rights to seek a divorce. In practice, qazis follow the old ways. Most Pakistani nikah certificates do not mention this specific clause. The law makes it a crime punishable by prison and a fine for a married Pakistani man to take another wife without the consent of his first wife, says Gohar Ali. “If Shoaib Malik and Sania Mirza had tied the knot before he divorced Ayesha, then, under section 5 of the family laws, he would have been liable for punishment,” he adds.
The divorce meant Ayesha entered the threemonth Iddat period, during which Shoaib has to pay her maintenance. There is a simple, scientific and socially responsible reason for this. If a divorced woman menstruates during the Iddat, she is clearly not pregnant and Iddat lasts just three months. If she is pregnant, Iddat continues till the baby is born. Pakistani legal experts say that in Ayesha’s case, she claimed a physical relationship with Shoaib and must therefore remain in seclusion during the Iddat period. Under the West Pakistan XXXV Act, which came into force in 1964, a woman can sue her husband if he refuses to maintain her without lawful cause. Barrister Gohar says that maintenance varies from case to case under the family law. Citing Shahbaz Sharif ’s divorce from his second wife Aaliya Honey, with whom he lived for just one year from 1993, he says: “The CM had to pay more than $1500 per month, during her period of Idaat.” Interestingly, Sharif took Tehmina Durrani as his third wife soon after divorcing Aaliya.
Hudood horror
The Hudood Ordinances were enacted in 1979 as part of General Zia’s Islamization process. They cover five areas: zina (non-marital sex) and rape; theft and armed robbery; qazf (or false accusation of zina); prohibited use of alcohol and narcotics, and the procedure for whipping. The ordinances made adultery and rape punishable by stoning. But it became difficult to prove rape because a woman was required to provide four adult male witnesses. Failure to provide proof of the alleged rape placed the woman at risk of prosecution for adultery.
The Women’s Protection Act of 2006, brought by the Pervez Musharraf regime, placed rape laws under the Pakistan Penal Code, based on civil law, rather than Sharia. Police no longer had the right to detain people suspected of having sex outside marriage. Adultery and non-marital consensual sex was still an offence but judges were henceforth allowed to try rape cases in criminal rather than Islamic courts. It did away with the need for four witnesses to prove rape and allowed conviction on the basis of forensic and circumstantial evidence. However, the Hudood Ordinances continue to be a part of Sharia law in Pakistan.
Mumbai: Never mind who ‘cheated’ whom in the Shoaib Malik-Ayesha Siddiqui story, the buck stops at the relevant provisions of the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Act, 1937. It has been rarely — and barely — amended in the 90 years since. This, largely because the ulema is opposed to change and regards a modern interpretation of the law as interference.
Mumbai-based scholar Asghar Ali Engineer is one of many who believe that “the cultural basis of the Muslim Personal Law actually lies in the customary laws of the Arab society”. He questions practices such as marrying and divorcing on the phone. These are not mentioned in the Muslim Personal Law and should be declared invalid, says Engineer. He laments Muslim trivialization of “marriage, meesaq-e-ghaliza (strong covenant between two adults)… a qazi can be bribed to distort the rules laid down for a valid nikah and talaq”.
The law’s most controversial elements include the triple talaq and polygamy.
TRIPLE TALAQ
Not mentioned in the Quran; an innovation. Most ulema agree that Allah considers talaq the most reprehensible of all that is allowed to man. However, they remain divided on the triple talaq. The Hanafi — one of Sunni Islam’s four schools of jurisprudence — allows the triple talaq. But this practice can lead to absurd scenarios, such as the Oriya man who informed his wife he had said ‘talaq’ three times in his dream the night before. The local maulvis promptly pronounced they were no longer man and wife. The man had to take his fight for the marriage to be restored all the way to the Supreme Court.
Other forms of divorce recognised under the Shariat Act, 1937 and applicable to all Muslims in India are: mubarra (divorce by mutual consent) and talaqe-tafweez (delegated divorce).
The subsequent Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 provided some equality as it granted Muslim women the right of khula — or the right to divorce their husbands. Its prime mover was a scholar, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi, who lamented that many Muslim women were converting to Hinduism to get rid of their “cruel” husbands who would neither treat them well nor divorce them easily. While this Act is often called progressive, there have been calls for further change. Advocate Neelofar Akhtar, president of Mumbai’s Family Court Bar Association, wants urgent amendment of the 1939 Act. This would be in line with reform of other laws dealing with other communities, notably the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Special Marriage Act, 1954. Both were amended in 2001 to allow women to file divorce petitions where they live. In contrast, the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 insists a woman can file for divorce only where she was married or where her husband lives. Akhtar describes it as “a discriminatory provision”. She has raised the issue at three All-India Muslim Personal Law Board meetings, the last in Lucknow just days ago. But the mullah-dominated, patriarchal law board has stonewalled the issue. Many point out that the board tried to deny Shah Bano maintenance from the husband who had divorced her in 1978. Subsequently, Rajiv Gandhi’s government diluted the Supreme Court’s judgment that Shah Bano was entitled to alimony. Instead, the government introduced the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. It is worth noting that the new Act is the only one that is enforceable in a criminal court, rather than in family courts (as are the Personal Law Act and Dissolution of Marriage Act). The 1986 Muslim Women Act admittedly instituted some reasonable provisions such as maintenance during the Iddat period, or three months from the day of divorce. But, it denied — at one stroke — the right to alimony even to destitute divorcees. Khula, or a woman filing for divorce, has had its share of controversy. Starlet Manyata married Sanjay Dutt after she filed for a khula from then husband Meraj. But Manyata’s first husband challenged the khula she secured from a qazi in Mumbai, saying only a man could give a khula. He was plain wrong, says lawyer Neelofar Akhtar, who fought and won Manyata’s case. “If the Quran allows men the right to pronounce talaq, it also grants women the right to khula.”
POLYGAMY
A provision enshrined in the Quran, though hedged around by many conditions; upheld by the 1937 Muslim Personal Law but grossly misinterpreted and misused. Those partial to the practice quote a Quranic verse as justification but forget that it was revealed during a great and bloody battle, which left many men dead and large numbers of destitute widows and orphans. The flipside is another verse in the same Quranic chapter, which stresses that no man is ever “able to be fair and just between women even if it is your ardent desire.” Senior cleric Maulana Shoeb Koti says it “proves the Quran lays emphasis on monogamy”. India, unlike Pakistan, does not have legislation such as the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, which proscribes marrying a second time without the first wife’s consent. Supreme Court advocate Saif Mahmood admits the lacunae: “An avowedly secular country like India has failed to give Muslim women what many less secular countries have.”
Islamabad: What do Pakistan prime minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Punjab chief minister Mian Shahbaz Sharif have in common? Both are believed to have more than one wife. PPP lawmaker Nabeel Gabol recently told parliament that roughly 80% of the country’s MNAs (Members of the National Assembly) and senators were muchmarried men. This, despite Pakistan’s Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961.
Supreme Court barrister Gohar Ali says there has to be a valid reason in order for a Pakistani man to marry a second time. For instance, “suppose a woman cannot become a mother due to medical reasons”. The law requires an arbitration council, headed by a local councillor, to identify the ‘reason’, Ali adds. But nearly half a century later, polygamy is still practised by isolated tribal communities and the feudal classes, which dominate parliament.
Parliamentary sources have given TOI a list of prominent politicians and public figures with more than one wife. The list is long. It names Gilani and Sharif, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) heavyweight Makhdoom Amin Fahim, Sindh chief minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah, and former federal ministers Yar Muhammed Rindh and Azam Khan Hoti.
It is interesting to note that Samina Khawar Hayat of the PML-N supported the practice of polygamy in the Punjab assembly just a few weeks ago. It was subsequently debated in the National Assembly. Are Pakistan’s politicians soft on polygamy?
The 1961 law empowered women by giving them the rights to seek a divorce. In practice, qazis follow the old ways. Most Pakistani nikah certificates do not mention this specific clause. The law makes it a crime punishable by prison and a fine for a married Pakistani man to take another wife without the consent of his first wife, says Gohar Ali. “If Shoaib Malik and Sania Mirza had tied the knot before he divorced Ayesha, then, under section 5 of the family laws, he would have been liable for punishment,” he adds.
The divorce meant Ayesha entered the threemonth Iddat period, during which Shoaib has to pay her maintenance. There is a simple, scientific and socially responsible reason for this. If a divorced woman menstruates during the Iddat, she is clearly not pregnant and Iddat lasts just three months. If she is pregnant, Iddat continues till the baby is born. Pakistani legal experts say that in Ayesha’s case, she claimed a physical relationship with Shoaib and must therefore remain in seclusion during the Iddat period. Under the West Pakistan XXXV Act, which came into force in 1964, a woman can sue her husband if he refuses to maintain her without lawful cause. Barrister Gohar says that maintenance varies from case to case under the family law. Citing Shahbaz Sharif ’s divorce from his second wife Aaliya Honey, with whom he lived for just one year from 1993, he says: “The CM had to pay more than $1500 per month, during her period of Idaat.” Interestingly, Sharif took Tehmina Durrani as his third wife soon after divorcing Aaliya.
Hudood horror
The Hudood Ordinances were enacted in 1979 as part of General Zia’s Islamization process. They cover five areas: zina (non-marital sex) and rape; theft and armed robbery; qazf (or false accusation of zina); prohibited use of alcohol and narcotics, and the procedure for whipping. The ordinances made adultery and rape punishable by stoning. But it became difficult to prove rape because a woman was required to provide four adult male witnesses. Failure to provide proof of the alleged rape placed the woman at risk of prosecution for adultery.
The Women’s Protection Act of 2006, brought by the Pervez Musharraf regime, placed rape laws under the Pakistan Penal Code, based on civil law, rather than Sharia. Police no longer had the right to detain people suspected of having sex outside marriage. Adultery and non-marital consensual sex was still an offence but judges were henceforth allowed to try rape cases in criminal rather than Islamic courts. It did away with the need for four witnesses to prove rape and allowed conviction on the basis of forensic and circumstantial evidence. However, the Hudood Ordinances continue to be a part of Sharia law in Pakistan.
Shoaib-Ayesha farce is legal disgrace for India
This is the kind of pressure that needs to be exerted by all members who are being falsely accused of 498a and DV 2005, if the international community is aware of Draconian laws like 498a it would be a Black mark on India's face and a major disgrace. The day the International Media gets wind of these backward laws is the day change will happen, take the Shoaib case as and example, this is like throwing crap on the face of India.
RIGHT & WRONG
April 11, 2010
Now that the decks have been cleared for the Sania Mirza-Shoaib Malik marriage on April 15, it is worth reflecting on the controversy that riveted the subcontinent for a week. Was it, as the brigade of the superior feels, a classic case of the media pandering to the base voyeuristic instincts of the great unwashed? Or, was it a contrived and cynical controversy that led to free publicity for two individuals, much to the embarrassment of two respectable families?
There is virtue in both assertions. The aam janata are conditioned to equate the private lives of celebrities with public interest and Sania was a star whose glamour quotient equalled Bollywood and cricketing greats. Her decision to marry Shoaib was governed by personal choice, but it didn’t distract from a widespread perception that the groom was unworthy of the iconic Hyderabad girl. It was this undercurrent of disapproval for the interloper, also seen as a habitual predator, which fuelled gory interest in the charges of duplicity levelled by the proverbial ‘other woman’. In the dogfight of reputations, Shoaib emerged as the clear loser and this ignominy may, unfortunately, rub off on his fiancé.
Yet, there was more to the filmi melodrama played out in Hyderabad than mere salacious titillation. The relationship of Shoaib and Ayesha Siddiqui has raised disturbing questions that centre on the cavalier misuse and manipulation of the laws and institutions governing the family. A marriage is governed by welldefined laws or social and religious customs. That Shoaib could persistently deny the fact that the nikahnama involving him and Ayesha was valid suggests that there is a huge grey area surrounding non-codified practices. In Pakistan, a marriage has to be registered — which this nikahnama was not — to be valid, while there is as yet no obligation to do the same in India. Second, the nikah was conducted over telephone, an unusual practice that Shoaib seized upon to contest the reality of the marriage to Ayesha. Indeed, had it not been for some telltale archival TV footage, the threat of non-bailable arrest under the draconian Section 498(a) of the Indian Penal Code and the intervention of community elders, the cricketer may have raised the pitch, claimed harassment and turned the whole incident into an emotive but ugly Indo-Pak spat.
Yet, Shoaib’s grudging admission of his marriage to Ayesha has in turn raised awkward questions. The elders in India upheld the legitimacy of an unregistered nikahnama contracted in Pakistan, where registration is obligatory. More to the point, they upheld a telephonic nikah — something clearly not anticipated in the religious texts. In the process they have opened the floodgates of dodgy, long-distance marriages where the bride and groom don’t even have to be physically present. The scope for misuse is profound and equal in scale to the fixed-term muta marriages that are a cover for prostitution.
The disturbing implications of the Shoaib-Ayesha marriage don’t stop here. The talaqnama negotiated between Shoaib and the Siddiqui family may have freed Ayesha from the unenviable status of a deserted wife and put an end to all criminal proceedings but the speed with which it was concluded is ominous. It suggests that the prescribed waiting period between the first two talaqs and the final divorce is largely illusory and can be circumvented according to convenience. In view of earlier rulings by Indian Muslim clerics that a peremptory triple talaq is valid even if the husband is either drunk or in a rage, the sanctioned fast-track divorce of a celebrity is certain to become a precedent, just as the telephone talaq by Chand Mohammed to Fiza in Chandigarh last year gave ideas to many.
It may interest Indians to note that Shoaib wouldn’t have been able to secure such a speedy divorce in Islamic Pakistan. Ayub Khan’s Muslim Family Law Ordinance, 1961, set out a 90-day timetable, including written notice and a formal hearing by an Arbitration Council, as the procedure for divorce. Even polygamy, a step Shoaib implicitly contemplated, involves cumbersome procedures in Pakistan, the violation of which could lead to imprisonment; in India, he could have had up to four wives quite casually.
Untainted by Zia-ul Haq’s subsequent tweaking and some perverse court judgments, Pakistan has relatively more equitable laws governing Muslim marriages and divorce. In India, as the Shoaib-Ayesha tangle has so vividly demonstrated, Muslim personal laws are an unregulated open market, prone to arbitrariness, theological hair-splitting, expediency and social pressures. The shifts in social consciousness and perceptions of justice that have accompanied economic growth, women’s empowerment and globalization are insufficiently reflected in India’s patchy Anglo-Mohammedan law. The bizarre Shoaib-Ayesha face-off was a legal farce and a national disgrace. In its elusive quest for a consensus, India can’t afford to shelve personal law reform.
RIGHT & WRONG
April 11, 2010
Now that the decks have been cleared for the Sania Mirza-Shoaib Malik marriage on April 15, it is worth reflecting on the controversy that riveted the subcontinent for a week. Was it, as the brigade of the superior feels, a classic case of the media pandering to the base voyeuristic instincts of the great unwashed? Or, was it a contrived and cynical controversy that led to free publicity for two individuals, much to the embarrassment of two respectable families?
There is virtue in both assertions. The aam janata are conditioned to equate the private lives of celebrities with public interest and Sania was a star whose glamour quotient equalled Bollywood and cricketing greats. Her decision to marry Shoaib was governed by personal choice, but it didn’t distract from a widespread perception that the groom was unworthy of the iconic Hyderabad girl. It was this undercurrent of disapproval for the interloper, also seen as a habitual predator, which fuelled gory interest in the charges of duplicity levelled by the proverbial ‘other woman’. In the dogfight of reputations, Shoaib emerged as the clear loser and this ignominy may, unfortunately, rub off on his fiancé.
Yet, there was more to the filmi melodrama played out in Hyderabad than mere salacious titillation. The relationship of Shoaib and Ayesha Siddiqui has raised disturbing questions that centre on the cavalier misuse and manipulation of the laws and institutions governing the family. A marriage is governed by welldefined laws or social and religious customs. That Shoaib could persistently deny the fact that the nikahnama involving him and Ayesha was valid suggests that there is a huge grey area surrounding non-codified practices. In Pakistan, a marriage has to be registered — which this nikahnama was not — to be valid, while there is as yet no obligation to do the same in India. Second, the nikah was conducted over telephone, an unusual practice that Shoaib seized upon to contest the reality of the marriage to Ayesha. Indeed, had it not been for some telltale archival TV footage, the threat of non-bailable arrest under the draconian Section 498(a) of the Indian Penal Code and the intervention of community elders, the cricketer may have raised the pitch, claimed harassment and turned the whole incident into an emotive but ugly Indo-Pak spat.
Yet, Shoaib’s grudging admission of his marriage to Ayesha has in turn raised awkward questions. The elders in India upheld the legitimacy of an unregistered nikahnama contracted in Pakistan, where registration is obligatory. More to the point, they upheld a telephonic nikah — something clearly not anticipated in the religious texts. In the process they have opened the floodgates of dodgy, long-distance marriages where the bride and groom don’t even have to be physically present. The scope for misuse is profound and equal in scale to the fixed-term muta marriages that are a cover for prostitution.
The disturbing implications of the Shoaib-Ayesha marriage don’t stop here. The talaqnama negotiated between Shoaib and the Siddiqui family may have freed Ayesha from the unenviable status of a deserted wife and put an end to all criminal proceedings but the speed with which it was concluded is ominous. It suggests that the prescribed waiting period between the first two talaqs and the final divorce is largely illusory and can be circumvented according to convenience. In view of earlier rulings by Indian Muslim clerics that a peremptory triple talaq is valid even if the husband is either drunk or in a rage, the sanctioned fast-track divorce of a celebrity is certain to become a precedent, just as the telephone talaq by Chand Mohammed to Fiza in Chandigarh last year gave ideas to many.
It may interest Indians to note that Shoaib wouldn’t have been able to secure such a speedy divorce in Islamic Pakistan. Ayub Khan’s Muslim Family Law Ordinance, 1961, set out a 90-day timetable, including written notice and a formal hearing by an Arbitration Council, as the procedure for divorce. Even polygamy, a step Shoaib implicitly contemplated, involves cumbersome procedures in Pakistan, the violation of which could lead to imprisonment; in India, he could have had up to four wives quite casually.
Untainted by Zia-ul Haq’s subsequent tweaking and some perverse court judgments, Pakistan has relatively more equitable laws governing Muslim marriages and divorce. In India, as the Shoaib-Ayesha tangle has so vividly demonstrated, Muslim personal laws are an unregulated open market, prone to arbitrariness, theological hair-splitting, expediency and social pressures. The shifts in social consciousness and perceptions of justice that have accompanied economic growth, women’s empowerment and globalization are insufficiently reflected in India’s patchy Anglo-Mohammedan law. The bizarre Shoaib-Ayesha face-off was a legal farce and a national disgrace. In its elusive quest for a consensus, India can’t afford to shelve personal law reform.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Woman uses RTI to get details of cheating husband
Fri, Apr 9,2010
New Delhi, The pay particulars of a government employee cannot be considered personal information, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled, while upholding the right of a 'betrayed' woman to get details of her husband's salary.
'The Commission holds that the pay particulars of a government employee cannot be considered as personal information by any means and directs the PIO (Public Information Officer) to provide the same to the appellant,' Information Commissioner Annapurna Dixit noted in her order while backing Chhattisgarh resident Shivkumari Kashyap, whose husband got married for the second time.
Kashyap, who believes that her husband Baldev Singh, an employee of South East Central (SEC) Railway, had entered the name of his second wife in his service book, used the Right to Information (RTI) act to get justice.
She filed an RTI application with the SEC Railway seeking the pay particulars of her husband as well as a copy of his service book, which has all the details of a government servant's official life, including information about his pay, increment and other things.
When SEC Railway denied her the information, Kashyap approached the CIC, stating during a hearing through videoconferencing on March 10 that she was the 'legitimate wedded wife of Baldev Singh and that her husband has been ill treating her'.
'He has also married a second time while remaining married to her (appellant),' her application stated.
'According to the appellant she believes that her husband has entered the name of his new wife in his service book and in this connection she wanted a copy of the service book, besides pay particulars,' the CIC was told.
On this, the CIC held that pay particulars of a government employee cannot be considered as personal information by any means.
'Also in view of the harassment undergone by the appellant in the hands of her husband and because the service book details of her husband being sought by her are not personal information as the same are already in the public domain, the PIO may also provide an attested copy of the first page of the service book to the appellant giving details of the name of the spouse entered therein,' Information Commissioner Dixit directed.
The CIC has said the information should be provided by April 10.
New Delhi, The pay particulars of a government employee cannot be considered personal information, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled, while upholding the right of a 'betrayed' woman to get details of her husband's salary.
'The Commission holds that the pay particulars of a government employee cannot be considered as personal information by any means and directs the PIO (Public Information Officer) to provide the same to the appellant,' Information Commissioner Annapurna Dixit noted in her order while backing Chhattisgarh resident Shivkumari Kashyap, whose husband got married for the second time.
Kashyap, who believes that her husband Baldev Singh, an employee of South East Central (SEC) Railway, had entered the name of his second wife in his service book, used the Right to Information (RTI) act to get justice.
She filed an RTI application with the SEC Railway seeking the pay particulars of her husband as well as a copy of his service book, which has all the details of a government servant's official life, including information about his pay, increment and other things.
When SEC Railway denied her the information, Kashyap approached the CIC, stating during a hearing through videoconferencing on March 10 that she was the 'legitimate wedded wife of Baldev Singh and that her husband has been ill treating her'.
'He has also married a second time while remaining married to her (appellant),' her application stated.
'According to the appellant she believes that her husband has entered the name of his new wife in his service book and in this connection she wanted a copy of the service book, besides pay particulars,' the CIC was told.
On this, the CIC held that pay particulars of a government employee cannot be considered as personal information by any means.
'Also in view of the harassment undergone by the appellant in the hands of her husband and because the service book details of her husband being sought by her are not personal information as the same are already in the public domain, the PIO may also provide an attested copy of the first page of the service book to the appellant giving details of the name of the spouse entered therein,' Information Commissioner Dixit directed.
The CIC has said the information should be provided by April 10.
PYAR KE SIDE EFFECTS, SHOAIB-SANIA-AYESHA DRAMA
Friday, May 9th, 2010
AS THE SHOAIB-SANIA-AYESHA DRAMA SEEMS TO HAVE CONCLUDED AMICABLY
With two nations engulfed in the Sania Mirza-Shoaib Malik-Ayesha Siddiqui saga, there hasn’t been a single day when the embattled Pakistan cricketer, his ex-wife and current bride-to-be weren’t in the news, for all the wrong reasons. With both parties indulging in mud-slinging, the saga got murkier by the day. The stalemate came to an end on Wednesday evening, when Shoaib Malik finally signed the talaqnama. But there seems to be more than what meets the eye. Hyderabad Times spoke to key players in the drama who managed to broker a deal to end the weeklong saga.
THE PRESSURES
With Shoaib Malik doing a flip-flop on his marriage, questions were raised, especially by the Malik and Mirza family on the authenticity of the nikaah. But it was Ayesha who provided damning evidence against the cricketer. “The evidence against Shoaib (Malik) was so strong that he had no way out but to sign the talaqnama. Ayesha had given the Hyderabad Police the dates when Shoaib came to Hyderabad to meet her. The police found corroborating entries on his passport on those particular dates. That, along with some damning evidence, which is too personal to discuss, finally nailed his lie,” says Shams Babar, a family friend of the Siddiquis. Major Qadri, one of the community leaders agrees that Ayesha had strong evidence to prove her marriage to Malik. “When I met Ayesha, she showed me evidences that left no doubt that she was indeed married to Malik,” says Qadri. Proof aside, sources also say it was the fatwa issued by the imam of the Tipu Sultan Masjid in Kolkata that put immense social pressure on the Maliks and Mirzas. “The saga was taking a religious turn putting the community’s reputation at stake. We had to intervene,” quips Qadri. Reliable sources however point out, “Both parties are hiding things, which if revealed could have made things dirtier than it already has. So, it was important to put a stop to it.”
THE MAIN PLAYER
Contrary to reports that community leaders pressurised the couple to see sense, it was actually the Hyderabad Police who helped resolve the matter. “It was the Hyderabad police who did their job well,” says Shams Babar. “Before the elders and community leaders could intervene, the Hyderabad Police went to Malik and told him that there could be an impending arrest based on the proof Ayesha had provided. There was no way out for Malik,” says Babar. Confirming this Qadri says, “The Mirza’s were in a hurry because the scheduled marriage cannot take place without Malik signing the talaqnama, as that would eventually lead to his arrest.”
WHO APPROACHED WHOM?
The Mirzas made the first move to resolve the conflict, considering the evidence staring in their face. Sania’s uncle and aunt had a discussion with the police after which a decision was reached to approach the community leaders to broker the deal. “The Mirzas approached us,” confirms Babar. “Ayesha was hell-bent on fighting for herself. It became an ego clash because Sania and Shoaib were stars who were accusing an ordinary woman of cheating,” informs a source.
WITH EVIDENCE
This time the leaders of the community left no stone unturned to make sure the talaqnama was indeed signed and authentic. “We have taken pictures of both parties signing the talaqnama in the presence of witnesses,” says Qadri, adding, “We’ve also taken separate pictures of the signed document.” Sources say that Ayesha got what she wanted including an apology from Shoaib. “Shoaib has apologised in private and in the talaqnama as well,” confirms Babar.
THE REAL AYESHA?
Vice principal of a school in Dubai, Ayesha Siddiqui is a strong and smart woman. She has been fighting for four long years and had to quit her job to come back to Hyderabad. Ayesha went in hiding due to stress, depression and obesity. “Ayesha had been through a traumatic time and has been confined to her house. She is also undergoing treatment for obesity from my daughter Sadiqa. Now, she finally feels vindicated,” says Shams Babar. Sources also confirm that Ayesha is more obese than the pictures that were shown on TV and print. “Shoaib thought he could ride through this controversy solely on his star power and the Mirzas’ political clout. But now that truth has prevailed, Ayesha is a happy woman. She plans to travel and live her life to the fullest,” says a close family friend.
AS THE SHOAIB-SANIA-AYESHA DRAMA SEEMS TO HAVE CONCLUDED AMICABLY
With two nations engulfed in the Sania Mirza-Shoaib Malik-Ayesha Siddiqui saga, there hasn’t been a single day when the embattled Pakistan cricketer, his ex-wife and current bride-to-be weren’t in the news, for all the wrong reasons. With both parties indulging in mud-slinging, the saga got murkier by the day. The stalemate came to an end on Wednesday evening, when Shoaib Malik finally signed the talaqnama. But there seems to be more than what meets the eye. Hyderabad Times spoke to key players in the drama who managed to broker a deal to end the weeklong saga.
THE PRESSURES
With Shoaib Malik doing a flip-flop on his marriage, questions were raised, especially by the Malik and Mirza family on the authenticity of the nikaah. But it was Ayesha who provided damning evidence against the cricketer. “The evidence against Shoaib (Malik) was so strong that he had no way out but to sign the talaqnama. Ayesha had given the Hyderabad Police the dates when Shoaib came to Hyderabad to meet her. The police found corroborating entries on his passport on those particular dates. That, along with some damning evidence, which is too personal to discuss, finally nailed his lie,” says Shams Babar, a family friend of the Siddiquis. Major Qadri, one of the community leaders agrees that Ayesha had strong evidence to prove her marriage to Malik. “When I met Ayesha, she showed me evidences that left no doubt that she was indeed married to Malik,” says Qadri. Proof aside, sources also say it was the fatwa issued by the imam of the Tipu Sultan Masjid in Kolkata that put immense social pressure on the Maliks and Mirzas. “The saga was taking a religious turn putting the community’s reputation at stake. We had to intervene,” quips Qadri. Reliable sources however point out, “Both parties are hiding things, which if revealed could have made things dirtier than it already has. So, it was important to put a stop to it.”
THE MAIN PLAYER
Contrary to reports that community leaders pressurised the couple to see sense, it was actually the Hyderabad Police who helped resolve the matter. “It was the Hyderabad police who did their job well,” says Shams Babar. “Before the elders and community leaders could intervene, the Hyderabad Police went to Malik and told him that there could be an impending arrest based on the proof Ayesha had provided. There was no way out for Malik,” says Babar. Confirming this Qadri says, “The Mirza’s were in a hurry because the scheduled marriage cannot take place without Malik signing the talaqnama, as that would eventually lead to his arrest.”
WHO APPROACHED WHOM?
The Mirzas made the first move to resolve the conflict, considering the evidence staring in their face. Sania’s uncle and aunt had a discussion with the police after which a decision was reached to approach the community leaders to broker the deal. “The Mirzas approached us,” confirms Babar. “Ayesha was hell-bent on fighting for herself. It became an ego clash because Sania and Shoaib were stars who were accusing an ordinary woman of cheating,” informs a source.
WITH EVIDENCE
This time the leaders of the community left no stone unturned to make sure the talaqnama was indeed signed and authentic. “We have taken pictures of both parties signing the talaqnama in the presence of witnesses,” says Qadri, adding, “We’ve also taken separate pictures of the signed document.” Sources say that Ayesha got what she wanted including an apology from Shoaib. “Shoaib has apologised in private and in the talaqnama as well,” confirms Babar.
THE REAL AYESHA?
Vice principal of a school in Dubai, Ayesha Siddiqui is a strong and smart woman. She has been fighting for four long years and had to quit her job to come back to Hyderabad. Ayesha went in hiding due to stress, depression and obesity. “Ayesha had been through a traumatic time and has been confined to her house. She is also undergoing treatment for obesity from my daughter Sadiqa. Now, she finally feels vindicated,” says Shams Babar. Sources also confirm that Ayesha is more obese than the pictures that were shown on TV and print. “Shoaib thought he could ride through this controversy solely on his star power and the Mirzas’ political clout. But now that truth has prevailed, Ayesha is a happy woman. She plans to travel and live her life to the fullest,” says a close family friend.
Malik was against divorce being made public
Friday, May 9th, 2010
Hyderabad: The announcement of Ayesha Siddiqui and Shoaib Malik’s divorce before the media on Wednesday, was much against Malik’s wish, revealed family sources. According to them, the Pak. cricketer was not keen on such an arrangement and had initially agreed to ‘talaq’ only on condition that Ayesha would not make the news public.
Sources said that when mediators of both the families met at Siddiqui’s residence late on Tuesday night to reach a compromise, those representing Malik insisted that Ayesha alias Maha sign an agreement, which clearly stated that she would not disclose anything about the divorce to the media and quietly withdraw the case filed against the cricketer.
“But Ayesha was adamant that she wanted the divorce to be made public. She tore those papers that they (Maliks) had first got,” said a close friend of the Siddiqui family.
Fearing arrest, Malik was later compelled to agree. “He knew his arrest was imminent on Wednesday if he did not settle for an out-of-court settlement. So his representatives again went back to the Mirza’s house and came back with fresh papers later that night which Ayesha eventually signed,” the source said.
Hyderabad: The announcement of Ayesha Siddiqui and Shoaib Malik’s divorce before the media on Wednesday, was much against Malik’s wish, revealed family sources. According to them, the Pak. cricketer was not keen on such an arrangement and had initially agreed to ‘talaq’ only on condition that Ayesha would not make the news public.
Sources said that when mediators of both the families met at Siddiqui’s residence late on Tuesday night to reach a compromise, those representing Malik insisted that Ayesha alias Maha sign an agreement, which clearly stated that she would not disclose anything about the divorce to the media and quietly withdraw the case filed against the cricketer.
“But Ayesha was adamant that she wanted the divorce to be made public. She tore those papers that they (Maliks) had first got,” said a close friend of the Siddiqui family.
Fearing arrest, Malik was later compelled to agree. “He knew his arrest was imminent on Wednesday if he did not settle for an out-of-court settlement. So his representatives again went back to the Mirza’s house and came back with fresh papers later that night which Ayesha eventually signed,” the source said.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Cops invite judge’s wrath
Friday, May 9th, 2010
About 20 Cases Filed Against Cops In Various Police Stations
OUR LEGAL CORRESPONDENT
Hyderabad: Justice C V Nagarjuna Reddy of the A P High Court on Thursday e x p re s s e d his ire against the functioning of the state police. Referring to about 20 cases filed against the men in khaki in different police stations across the state, he said the police were either indulging in excessive action and interfering in civil cases or were not taking necessary action in the cases where citizens had lodged genuine complaints.
In one case, Justice Reddy called for a report from the SP of Kurnool on whether any departmental action has been initiated against Ameer Pasha, the SI of Kodumolu police station in Kurnool, against whom the judge said there have been repeated complaints.
In the latest petition before the court, he is alleged to have helped the sons and daughters-in-law of Mahbub Bee to deprive her of her only house property. Justice Reddy made clear in his interim order that the court would be forced to draw adverse inference.
In another petition, it was complained that the police in Obula Cheruvu Devula PS in Anantapur were forcing a couple to supply coffee and tea on a regular basis after summoning them on the pretext of investigating a crime in which their missing son Rajashekar Reddy is alleged to be involved.
The judge directed the police not to harass the petitioners Gollapalli Lakshmipathi Reddy and his wife.
In the third petition, the judge directed the police not to interfere with the running of a bar and restaurant at Kharkhana in the city.
The petitioner, Mirthland Hotels, complained that they paid Rs 25 lakh as excise licence fee and even obtained permission from the Cantonment Board. Yet, the police were refusing permission, it contended.
Bail denied
Justice P Swaroop Reddy of the A P High Court on Thursday rejected a bail application by Kattali Mohan, the prime accused in two attempts on Congress Chittoor MLA C K Jayachandra Reddy alias C K Babu. The accused, lodged in the jail since June 2008, moved the court for bail on the ground that the charge sheet was filed and investigations completed. The judge refused to enlarge him on bail after the prosecution informed the court that there were serious apprehensions that if enlarged on bail, the petitioner is likely to repeat his earlier abortive murder attempts.
About 20 Cases Filed Against Cops In Various Police Stations
OUR LEGAL CORRESPONDENT
Hyderabad: Justice C V Nagarjuna Reddy of the A P High Court on Thursday e x p re s s e d his ire against the functioning of the state police. Referring to about 20 cases filed against the men in khaki in different police stations across the state, he said the police were either indulging in excessive action and interfering in civil cases or were not taking necessary action in the cases where citizens had lodged genuine complaints.
In one case, Justice Reddy called for a report from the SP of Kurnool on whether any departmental action has been initiated against Ameer Pasha, the SI of Kodumolu police station in Kurnool, against whom the judge said there have been repeated complaints.
In the latest petition before the court, he is alleged to have helped the sons and daughters-in-law of Mahbub Bee to deprive her of her only house property. Justice Reddy made clear in his interim order that the court would be forced to draw adverse inference.
In another petition, it was complained that the police in Obula Cheruvu Devula PS in Anantapur were forcing a couple to supply coffee and tea on a regular basis after summoning them on the pretext of investigating a crime in which their missing son Rajashekar Reddy is alleged to be involved.
The judge directed the police not to harass the petitioners Gollapalli Lakshmipathi Reddy and his wife.
In the third petition, the judge directed the police not to interfere with the running of a bar and restaurant at Kharkhana in the city.
The petitioner, Mirthland Hotels, complained that they paid Rs 25 lakh as excise licence fee and even obtained permission from the Cantonment Board. Yet, the police were refusing permission, it contended.
Bail denied
Justice P Swaroop Reddy of the A P High Court on Thursday rejected a bail application by Kattali Mohan, the prime accused in two attempts on Congress Chittoor MLA C K Jayachandra Reddy alias C K Babu. The accused, lodged in the jail since June 2008, moved the court for bail on the ground that the charge sheet was filed and investigations completed. The judge refused to enlarge him on bail after the prosecution informed the court that there were serious apprehensions that if enlarged on bail, the petitioner is likely to repeat his earlier abortive murder attempts.
Shoaib still caught in legal mesh
Friday, April 9th, 2010
Hyderabad: Shoaib Malik clearly didn’t see this coming. He may have given ‘talaq’ to Maha Siddiqui on Wednesday hoping to free his mind of the worry of police cases before his marriage, but indications are that it will take some time before he is out of the legal mess.
“An offence under Section 498 A of IPC has been registered against him. This is a serious charge, this can’t be withdrawn against him in one go,” a police official told the Media. Section 498 (A) relates to ‘harassment of a married woman by her husband or his family members’.
Acting on Maha Siddiqui’s letter to the police commissioner seeking withdrawl of all charges against Malik, cops of the Central Crime Station (dealing with the case) are now seeking the opinion of K Sreevani, public prosecutor of the 13th Chief Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Court on how to free Malik of the legal hassles. This court deals with all CCS cases and thus has the authority to close the Ayesha-Shoaib matter.
Sources say that Sreevani has told the police that while they can theoretically close a case saying “action dropped for lack of evidence’’, but in this case they can’t do so. This because they have collected all the evidence and presented it to the court.
What could well add to Malik’s woes, the public prosecutor has told the police that Section 498 (A) of the IPC can be compromised upon only if the two parties (Maha and Malik in this case) decide to live together. Since that is not possible in this case, it will take a minimum of three months for this section to be dropped against him.
Incidentally this section, and also Section 420 (that has also been registered against Shoaib) can be dropped only with the court’s permission. This is not possible just by virtue of a letter that Maha Siddiqui wrote to the police commissioner on Wednesday. In her application, Maha alias Ayesha said that all the “disputes and the matter’’ had been settled amicably. The court may also direct the two parties to the Lok Adalat which can hear the matter and then notify the court to close the case, which again may take months.
There is another way by which Shoaib can get out of the tangle. By this, the police files a charge sheet in the case and the court can choose to examine only the complainant Maha Siddiqui, who has remained behind the scene so far. Once she says in court that she withdraws the charges, the prosecution would term her as hostile witness in the case and close the matter.
Whether such cases can be manipulated and time period shortened given the highprofile nature of the people involved, legal experts said that a court like this with no ‘celebrity experience’ may take time to warm up to short cuts, if any.
But analysts said that police, if they want, can figure a way out stating that they have not got any ‘concrete evidence’.
Wedding as scheduled
The noise surrounding Shoaib’s high-voltage divorce may have finally died, but the media vigil outside the Mirzas’ Jubilee Hills house continues. While little has come out by way of information from the tight-lipped Mirzas, Sania’s father Imran answered in the affirmative, when asked about his daughter’s wedding plans. Settling all speculation, he confirmed that Sania will wed Shoaib in Hyderabad on April 15th. Imran told TOI, “Sania and Shoaib’s wedding will take place as scheduled. The reception will be held at the Taj Krishna on April 15th.” Sources close to the family added that the nikah, which will be a small, private ceremony, will take place a little earlier on the same day, and will be attended only by close family.
Hyderabad: Shoaib Malik clearly didn’t see this coming. He may have given ‘talaq’ to Maha Siddiqui on Wednesday hoping to free his mind of the worry of police cases before his marriage, but indications are that it will take some time before he is out of the legal mess.
“An offence under Section 498 A of IPC has been registered against him. This is a serious charge, this can’t be withdrawn against him in one go,” a police official told the Media. Section 498 (A) relates to ‘harassment of a married woman by her husband or his family members’.
Acting on Maha Siddiqui’s letter to the police commissioner seeking withdrawl of all charges against Malik, cops of the Central Crime Station (dealing with the case) are now seeking the opinion of K Sreevani, public prosecutor of the 13th Chief Additional Metropolitan Magistrate Court on how to free Malik of the legal hassles. This court deals with all CCS cases and thus has the authority to close the Ayesha-Shoaib matter.
Sources say that Sreevani has told the police that while they can theoretically close a case saying “action dropped for lack of evidence’’, but in this case they can’t do so. This because they have collected all the evidence and presented it to the court.
What could well add to Malik’s woes, the public prosecutor has told the police that Section 498 (A) of the IPC can be compromised upon only if the two parties (Maha and Malik in this case) decide to live together. Since that is not possible in this case, it will take a minimum of three months for this section to be dropped against him.
Incidentally this section, and also Section 420 (that has also been registered against Shoaib) can be dropped only with the court’s permission. This is not possible just by virtue of a letter that Maha Siddiqui wrote to the police commissioner on Wednesday. In her application, Maha alias Ayesha said that all the “disputes and the matter’’ had been settled amicably. The court may also direct the two parties to the Lok Adalat which can hear the matter and then notify the court to close the case, which again may take months.
There is another way by which Shoaib can get out of the tangle. By this, the police files a charge sheet in the case and the court can choose to examine only the complainant Maha Siddiqui, who has remained behind the scene so far. Once she says in court that she withdraws the charges, the prosecution would term her as hostile witness in the case and close the matter.
Whether such cases can be manipulated and time period shortened given the highprofile nature of the people involved, legal experts said that a court like this with no ‘celebrity experience’ may take time to warm up to short cuts, if any.
But analysts said that police, if they want, can figure a way out stating that they have not got any ‘concrete evidence’.
Wedding as scheduled
The noise surrounding Shoaib’s high-voltage divorce may have finally died, but the media vigil outside the Mirzas’ Jubilee Hills house continues. While little has come out by way of information from the tight-lipped Mirzas, Sania’s father Imran answered in the affirmative, when asked about his daughter’s wedding plans. Settling all speculation, he confirmed that Sania will wed Shoaib in Hyderabad on April 15th. Imran told TOI, “Sania and Shoaib’s wedding will take place as scheduled. The reception will be held at the Taj Krishna on April 15th.” Sources close to the family added that the nikah, which will be a small, private ceremony, will take place a little earlier on the same day, and will be attended only by close family.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Shoaib Malik may not get his passport back soon, may face arrest
Monday, April 5, 2010 23:07 IST
Hyderabad: Former Pakistani cricket captain Shoaib Malik, facing a cheating case here, may not be able to leave the country soon as his passport is required by police for verification following a criminal complaint by Ayesha Siddiqui, who claims she is married to him.
Hyderabad police commissioner AK Khan today indicated that he could not give any time-frame within which the investigation into the case would be completed.
"Timeline is very difficult to set at this stage because we are not yet totally sure how much of work it entails," Khan said. "As ofnow, the rough assessment is that there are 14 to 15 witnesses in and around Hyderabad itself."
The police this morning took Malik's passport and asked him not to leave the country as they questioned him in the wake of a complaint of cheating, harassment, and criminal intimidation lodged by Ayesha's father.
"As part of the investigation, Shoaib's passport has been taken. We felt it necessary to check from the passport the veracity of her [Ayesha's] assertion that Shoaib Malik had visited Hyderabad during the alleged wedding period," Khan told reporters this evening.
He clarified that Malik's passport had not been confiscated or impounded. It had merely been taken to verify entries.
Asked when the cricketer would get his passport back, Khan said that for now it would remain with the central crime station (CCS), a wing of the Hyderabad police, which has taken over the investigation.
The police commissioner said that besides the passport, many other documents needed to be examined. "Maybe the [Central]Forensic Science Laboratory will also get into the picture," he said.
According to Khan, the police will have to reach out to witnessesoutside Hyderabad as well. The Siddiqui family has been asked to produce all material evidence in support of its initial complaint.
The immigration authorities have been informed about the case, Khan said. "It would enable them to keep a watch at airports... in case the accused intends to travel outside."
Asked if Malik faces arrest, Khan said, "If it becomes necessary to arrest somebody, we will do it, but that is all based on how the case evolves and what sort of evidence we come across."
On Ayesha's claim that she had suffered a miscarriage after her marriage to Malik, Khan said the investigating officers will look into this aspect to establish its veracity.
"Our concern is to establish the truth and put it before the court," he said. The police chief said that to ensure a thorough and professional investigation, Malik's case had been transferred to the CCS.
Asked if the investigation would be completed before April 15, the day Malik and tennis star Sania Mirza plan to get married, Khan said, "We will go by the facts of the case and investigate.
"Now, we are in the process of collecting evidence and examining witnesses. At every stage, we will take legal help also and once the whole thing is completed, we will weigh the quality of evidence that we have and decide what should be done with the case.
"We are not going to hurry up with or delay the case. The investigation process has just started and it will take a long time in examining the witnesses, including the qazis."
Referring to Malik's visa, he said, "The visa he has does not require him to report to the police, but during the course of the investigation, if it is required to impose certain restrictions on Shoaib, we will do it."
Hyderabad: Former Pakistani cricket captain Shoaib Malik, facing a cheating case here, may not be able to leave the country soon as his passport is required by police for verification following a criminal complaint by Ayesha Siddiqui, who claims she is married to him.
Hyderabad police commissioner AK Khan today indicated that he could not give any time-frame within which the investigation into the case would be completed.
"Timeline is very difficult to set at this stage because we are not yet totally sure how much of work it entails," Khan said. "As ofnow, the rough assessment is that there are 14 to 15 witnesses in and around Hyderabad itself."
The police this morning took Malik's passport and asked him not to leave the country as they questioned him in the wake of a complaint of cheating, harassment, and criminal intimidation lodged by Ayesha's father.
"As part of the investigation, Shoaib's passport has been taken. We felt it necessary to check from the passport the veracity of her [Ayesha's] assertion that Shoaib Malik had visited Hyderabad during the alleged wedding period," Khan told reporters this evening.
He clarified that Malik's passport had not been confiscated or impounded. It had merely been taken to verify entries.
Asked when the cricketer would get his passport back, Khan said that for now it would remain with the central crime station (CCS), a wing of the Hyderabad police, which has taken over the investigation.
The police commissioner said that besides the passport, many other documents needed to be examined. "Maybe the [Central]Forensic Science Laboratory will also get into the picture," he said.
According to Khan, the police will have to reach out to witnessesoutside Hyderabad as well. The Siddiqui family has been asked to produce all material evidence in support of its initial complaint.
The immigration authorities have been informed about the case, Khan said. "It would enable them to keep a watch at airports... in case the accused intends to travel outside."
Asked if Malik faces arrest, Khan said, "If it becomes necessary to arrest somebody, we will do it, but that is all based on how the case evolves and what sort of evidence we come across."
On Ayesha's claim that she had suffered a miscarriage after her marriage to Malik, Khan said the investigating officers will look into this aspect to establish its veracity.
"Our concern is to establish the truth and put it before the court," he said. The police chief said that to ensure a thorough and professional investigation, Malik's case had been transferred to the CCS.
Asked if the investigation would be completed before April 15, the day Malik and tennis star Sania Mirza plan to get married, Khan said, "We will go by the facts of the case and investigate.
"Now, we are in the process of collecting evidence and examining witnesses. At every stage, we will take legal help also and once the whole thing is completed, we will weigh the quality of evidence that we have and decide what should be done with the case.
"We are not going to hurry up with or delay the case. The investigation process has just started and it will take a long time in examining the witnesses, including the qazis."
Referring to Malik's visa, he said, "The visa he has does not require him to report to the police, but during the course of the investigation, if it is required to impose certain restrictions on Shoaib, we will do it."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)