NIL Alimony to Erraneous wife ? Is that possible ?

Dear Jogeshwar ji

This has reference to your post at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saveindianfamily/message/47411 where you said

>>>>>>>
I was thinking that Zero maintenance to errant wife is SIF stand.
Now I find that it is not. Right?
<<<<<<<

Initially I was also stead fast on "Zero Tolerance / Zero Maintenance to Errant wife"

But with cases like the one below where the apex court INCREASED permanent alimony to an errant wife, I am forced to re think !!

I am referring to Durga Prasanna Tripathy v Arundhati Tripathy 2005 INSC 430 23 August 2005  blogged at the following places

http://tinyurl.com/2lvlym
http://tinyurl.com/2thxlt
http://tinyurl.com/34fkj5

and at my other blogs

Regards
Vinayak

Durga Prasanna Tripathy v Arundhati Tripathy 2005 INSC 430 23 August 2005

Blog Note : This case law is obtained from the World LLI org database. I thank them for the same. URL reference to the World LLI pages are also included below

Durga Prasanna Tripathy v. Arundhati Tripathy [2005] INSC 430 (23 August 2005)

Ruma Pal & Dr. AR. Lakshmanan

(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 9794 OF 2004) Dr. AR. Lakshmanan, J.

Leave granted.

This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.12.2003 passed by the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Civil Appeal No. 10 of 2001 whereby the High Court allowing the appeal filed by the respondent-herein/wife under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the ground of cruelty and desertion.

The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 05.03.1991. After the marriage, the parties led their conjugal life in the village to which the appellant belongs and the respondent-wife persuaded the appellant to stay at Bhubaneswar, the place of her service as well as her parental place. The husband did not approve such proposal as a result of which dispute arose between the parties. It was alleged that the respondent-wife behaved with her husband and her in-laws in a cruel manner. She deserted the appellant by staying in the house of her father since 22.10.1991. The appellant and his parents tried their best to bring the respondent-wife to the marital home but all their efforts were in vain. Thereafter, on 26.05.1996, for the marriage ceremony of the appellant's younger brother, the mother of the appellant also went to bring the respondent but the latter was not inclined to come but misbehaved and insulted her mother-in-law. The appellant's father expired and for which also the father of the respondent was requested by the appellant to send the respondent to the house of the appellant since being the eldest daughter-in-law but then also the respondent did not come. Even after the death of the appellant's father, the respondent in spite of several requests by the appellant and his family members did not join the company of the appellant. The respondent, furthermore, joined the Office of the Civil Supplies at Puri and in view of this, the respondent and her father always insisted the appellant to shift to Bhubaneswar. The appellant, in view of this, after about 7 years from the date of separation took redress of the Court. After leaving the appellant, the respondent also joined as a Junior Assistant in the office of the Civil Supply Corporation.

The respondent-wife denied the allegations made against her. She further stated in her written statement that due to maltreatment of the appellant's mother and brother she came back to her parents house. She also stated that she was willing to live separately from her mother-in-law and brother-in-law. She, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the proceedings.

Both parties led oral evidence in support of their respective cases. The appellant was examined as P.W.1. During his evidence he corroborated the facts made in the original application for divorce. He has also stated that he is not willing to stay with the respondent as husband and wife after a long lapse of about 9 years and there is no chance of reunion between the parties. The respondent examined herself as O.P.W1. She also filed bunch of documents. On the basis of the pleadings and evidence of the parties, the Courts below framed an issue whether there is just and sufficient cause to pass a decree of divorce against the respondent-wife on the grounds of cruelty and desertion or not.

The Family Court, Cuttack passed its judgment and allowed the petition filed by the appellant-herein under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and thereby granted decree of divorce. The Family Court, after having heard the parties and after perusing the evidence on record, held as follows:- "When the wife-respondent declines to come to the marital home, undoubtedly it gave mental shock to the petitioner-husband, which knew no bounds. There is also no chance of reunion or reconciliation between the parties. The only course open to the Court is to pass a decree of divorce thereby to put an end to the litigation. The husband-petitioner has proved to the satisfaction of the Court that the wife-respondent is not only cruel, but also deserted him since more than seven years, which are good grounds for passing a decree of divorce." "However, as regards the alimony the learned Judge directed the petitioner-husband to pay Rs.50,000/- to the wife-respondent towards her permanent alimony, which was to be paid/deposited in the shape of bank draft." Aggrieved by the judgment of the Family Court, the respondent filed a civil appeal before the High Court of Orissa under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984.

The appellant contended before the High Court that while allowing the proceedings under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of cruelty and desertion, the Family Court dissolved the marriage solemnized between the parties on 05.03.1991 and has directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards permanent alimony to the respondent and pursuant to such direction, the appellant has deposited the amount by way of a bank draft.

The High Court, vide its judgment dated 23.12.2003, set aside the decree of divorce passed by the Family Court and allowed the appeal filed by the respondent herein holding that the appellant had failed to prove cruelty and desertion as against the respondent.

Aggrieved against the judgment of the High Court, the appellant preferred the above Special Leave Petition.

We heard Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Ms. S.S. Panicker, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that the High Court has failed to appreciate that the failure of the respondent to substantiate the alleged reasons for staying away and omission to demonstrate readiness and willingness to discharge continuing obligation to return to matrimonial home taken together were sufficient to establish animus deserendi, necessary to prove legal desertion by the wife as per the principles laid down by this Court in a number of cases.

He would further submit that the appellant has proved the desertion of the respondent- wife to the satisfaction of the Courts below and after considering all the aspects and evidence led in support of the desertion, the Family Court, after satisfying itself that a reunion between the parties is not possible, has passed a decree of divorce and in pursuance to the direction of the Family Court, the appellant had deposited a sum of Rs.50,000/- by way of a bank draft in favour of the respondent herein. It was further submitted that the High Court has failed to appreciate that in the present case both have been staying separately for about the last 14 years and in the meantime, the respondent has got a job at Bhubaneswar and moreover the appellant and his family members had on quite a number of times tried to get the respondent to her matrimonial home but of no avail. It was further submitted that the High Court has failed to appreciate that the allegations of dowry demand as made by the respondent by the mother-in-law and the brother-in-law are concocted afterthoughts of the respondent to defend her inexplicable stand which is evident from the fact that though the respondent had left her matrimonial home in the year 1991 itself she had only chosen to lodge a complaint against her mother-in-law and brother-in-law before the Mahila Commission only in the year 1988 i.e. after about 7 years.

Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee further submitted that the parties have been living separately for almost 14 years which means that there is an irretrievable breakdown of marriage and that because of such breakdown of marriage, the marriage between the parties has been rendered a complete deadwood. Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, in support of his submissions, cited the following judgments of this Court.

1. Anjana Kishore vs. Puneet Kishore, (2002) 10 SCC 194 (Three-Judge Bench)

2. Swati Verma (Smt) vs. Rajan Verma and Others (2004) 1 SCC 123

3. Sanat Kumar Agarwal vs. Nandini Agarwal, (1990) 1 SCC 475

4. Adhyatma Bhattar Alwar vs. Adhyatma Bhattar Sri Devi, (2002) 1 SCC 308

5. G.V.N. Kameswara Rao vs. G. Jabilli, (2002) 2 SCC 296 Ms. S.S. Panicker, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the plea and evidence of the appellant before the Family Court was at variance and that in absence of corroboration the allegation of the appellant as to the desertion or cruelty by the respondent-wife could not be proved by the appellant. It was submitted that the High Court has rightly arrived at the conclusion that the order of the Family Court was erroneous as the same was passed by misquoting the evidence of the respondent.

She would further submit that there is no error in the impugned order of the High Court much less an error requiring interference by this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. It was submitted that the order of the Family Court is prima facie illegal, erroneous and that the Family Court failed to take into account the evidence adduced by the parties in its proper perspective. According to learned counsel for the respondent, a perusal of the evidence would make it amply clear that the appellant in his evidence has clearly admitted that he had himself led the respondent on 23.10.1991 in her father's house which was contrary to the statement in the divorce petition wherein he had made a specific allegation that the respondent had left the matrimonial home on her own accord. He had not written any letter nor taken any relations to persuade the respondent to lead marital life with him and that he was also not willing to stay with the respondent and to continue the marital relations. Learned counsel for the respondent invited our attention to the evidence led in by both the parties and misquoting of the evidence by the Court. The respondent, on the contrary, in her evidence had stated that after 23.10.1991 she had been to the matrimonial home with her father and other relations but the appellant refused to accept her, so she had to take shelter at her parental home, that the appellant was on visiting terms to her parental home that she had led conjugal life with the appellant till February, 1996, that even in the year 1997, the respondent had stayed with the appellant at Jajpur in a rented accommodation but was again forced to quit because of harassment by the in-laws that she was also willing to stay with the appellant at Jaipur and was interested in continuing their marital relations. Learned counsel submitted that the Family Court has failed to take note that the wife had categorically stated before the Conciliation Officer as also in the evidence and pleadings before the Family Court that she was interested and willing to live with the husband and that the appellant on the other hand had clearly stated that he did not want to continue the marital relations. Learned counsel further argued that the appellant has also not been able to prove the allegations of cruelty against the respondent and that the appellant had only alleged that the conduct of the respondent of not returning to the matrimonial home, her lack of cooperation in establishing normal cohabitation, her repeatedly causing social embarrassment to the appellant by not performing the last rites of the father-in-law and not participating in a marriage ceremony of the appellant's brother and filing false complaint against the mother-in-law and brother-in-law had caused mental depression, anguish and frustration to the appellant amounts to mental cruelty. She would also further submit that the allegations which are necessary to constitute desertion are not present in the instant case. It was also submitted that the appellant filed divorce petition in the year 1998 that is almost 7 years after the alleged desertion by the wife from 23.10.1991 and that the appellant has not given any valid explanation for the unexplained delay in filing the divorce petition.

Concluding her arguments, she submitted that the appellant was not entitled to a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion and he and his family members were themselves responsible for the respondent quitting the matrimonial home and, therefore, the appellant cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong for obtaining a decree for divorce in violation of the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act.

She submitted that the High Court was, therefore, correct in setting right an apparent error on the face of the order of the Family Court as the order of the Family Court was passed without taking into the evidence of the respondent and the appellant.

We have carefully gone through the pleadings, the evidence led and the judgments cited by learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for the respondent has not cited any ruling in support of her contentions.

This is a most unfortunate case where both the parties could not carry on their marital ties beyond a period of 7 months of their marriage. The marriage between the parties took place on 05.03.1991 and it is the specific case of the appellant that the respondent deserted him on 22.10.1999 and never again returned to her matrimonial home. Today the position is that the parties have been living separately for almost 14 years which means that there is an irretrievable breakdown of marriage and that because of such breakdown of marriage the marriage between the parties has been rendered a complete deadwood. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that no useful purpose will be served by keeping such a marriage alive on paper, which would only aggravate the agony of the parties. Therefore, he would pray that in the fitness of things and in the interest of justice, the marriage between the parties is forthwith terminated by a decree of divorce. We have perused the orders passed by the Family Court and also of the High Court. Both the Family Court as well as the High Court made efforts to bring about a reconciliation/rapprochement between the parties. The Family Court in this regard gave a clear finding that in spite of good deal of endeavour to effect a reconciliation the same could not be effected because of the insistence of the respondent to remain separately from her in-laws. It was totally an impracticable solution.

In this context, we may usefully refer to page 35 of the paper book which reads as follows:

"Be that as it may, good deal of endeavour was made by the Conciliation Cell attached to the Court as per Section 9 of the Family Courts Act and as well as by this Court for a compromise between the parties, but the respondent-wife insisted and wanted to remain separately from her in- laws which was totally impracticable on the part of the petitioner-husband." This apart, since October, 1991 till date the respondent has not taken any steps from her side to go back to her matrimonial home. The said fact gets reflected from her own deposition before the Family Court wherein she has deposed as under:- "On 23.10.1991, the petitioner left me in the house of my father. I went to the marital home with my father and other relations, but the petitioner created trouble and did not accept me as his wife. So I came away to my father and has taken shelter there." "The petitioner left me in my father's house after the marriage on 23.10.1991. It is not a fact that I came away suo moto from the marital home deserting the petitioner. Again I came and stayed in the marital home from December, 1991 till February 1992 and thereafter came to my father's house." The Family Court has given cogent and convincing reasons for passing the decree of divorce in favour of the appellant. Having been convinced that there was no chance of reunion or reconciliation between the parties, more so because of the complaint filed by the respondent before the Mahila Commission, the Family Court with a view to put a quietus to the litigation inter se and the bitterness between the parties rightly passed the decree of divorce.

The Division Bench of the High Court by the impugned judgment has reversed the finding of the Family Court. The learned Judges of the High Court held against the appellant on two points, namely:- (a) Misquoting of the evidence of the respondent, by the Family Court; and (b) Inconsistent plea of the appellant with regard to leaving the matrimonial home by the respondent.

Both the aforesaid points taken into consideration by the learned Judges of the High Court cannot, in our view, be construed as a finding upon the merits of the case.

In our view that 14 years have elapsed since the appellant and the respondent have been separated and there is no possibility of the appellant and the respondent resuming the normal marital life even though the respondent is willing to join her husband. There has been an irretrievable breakdown of marriage between the appellant the respondent. The respondent has also preferred to keep silent about her absence during the death of her father-in-law and during the marriage ceremony of her brother-in-law. The complaint before the Mahila Commission does not implicate the appellant for dowry harassment though the respondent in her evidence before the Family Court has alleged dowry harassment by the appellant. It is pertinent to mention here that a complaint before the Mahila Commission was lodged after 7 years of the marriage alleging torture for dowry by the mother-in-law and brother-in-law during the initial years of marriage. The said complaint was filed in 1998 that is only after notice was issued by the Family Court on 27.03.1997 on the application filed by the appellant under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court, on examination of the evidence on record, and having observed the demeanor of the witnesses concluded that the appellant had proved that the respondent is not only cruel but also deserted him since more than 7 years. The desertion as on date is more than 14 years and, therefore, in our view there has been an irretrievable breakdown of marriage between the appellant and the respondent. Even the Conciliation Officer before the Family Court gave its report that the respondent was willing to live with the appellant on the condition that they lived separately from his family. The respondent in her evidence had not disputed the fact that attempts have been made by the appellant and his family to bring her back to the matrimonial home for leading a conjugal life with the appellant. Apart from that, relationship between the appellant and the respondent have become strained over the years due to the desertion of the appellant by the respondent for several years. Under the circumstances, the appellant had proved before the Family Court both the factum of separation as well as animus deserendi which are the essential elements of desertion. The evidence adduced by the respondent before the Family Court belies her stand taken by her before the Family Court. Enough instances of cruelty meted out by the respondent to the appellant were cited before the Family Court and the Family Court being convinced granted the decree of divorce. The harassment by the in-laws of the respondent was an after-thought since the same was alleged after a gap of 7 years of marriage and desertion by the respondent. The appellant having failed in his efforts to get back the respondent to her matrimonial home and having faced the trauma of performing the last rites of his deceased father without the respondent and having faced the ill-treatment meted out by the respondent to him and his family had, in our opinion, no other efficacious remedy but to approach the Family Court for decree of divorce.

In the following two cases, this Court has taken a consistent view that where it is found that the marriage between the parties has irretrievably broken down and has been rendered a dead wood, exigency of the situation demands, the dissolution of such a marriage by a decree of divorce to put an end to the agony and bitterness:

(a) Anjana Kishore vs. Puneet Kishore (2002) 10 SCC 194 (b) Swati Verma (Smt.) vs. Rajan Verma & Ors. (2004) 1 SCC 123 Likewise, in the following three cases, this Court has observed that the question of desertion is a matter of inference to be drawn from the facts and circumstances of each case and those facts have to be viewed as to the purpose which is revealed by those facts or by conduct and expression of intention, both anterior and subsequent to the actual act of separation.

(a) Sanat Kumar Agarwal vs. Nandini Agarwal (1990) 1 SCC 475 (b) Adhyatma Bhattar Alwar vs. Adhyatma Bhattar Sri Devi (2002) 1 SCC 308 (c) G.V.N. Kameswara Rao vs. G. Jabilli (2002) 2 SCC 296 The submission made by Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent has for all practical purposes become dead, that there can be no chance of being retrieved and that it was better to bring the marriage to an end merits acceptance and force.

In Chanderkala Trivedi (Smt) vs Dr. S.P. Trivedi, (1993) 4 SCC 232, which is an appeal before this Court against the grant of decree for divorce by the Bombay High Court on the ground of cruelty. When leave was granted, this Court observed that they are granting leave because it appears to them that the marriage between the parties was in all practical purposes dead and the enforced continuity of the marriage will only mean that the parties will spend more years in bitterness against each other. Since the husband was in a position to provide reasonable maintenance or permanent alimony, this Court granted special leave. At the time of final hearing, this Court deleted the findings and has, however, decided not to interfere with the order passed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. The husband, on the persuasion of this Court, agreed to provide a one bed-room flat to the wife in a locality where it can be available between Rs. 3 and 4 lacs. Therefore, while dismissing the appeal, this Court directed the husband to purchase a flat for the wife and further deposit a sum of Rs. 2 lacs by means of a demand draft in the name of the appellant with the Family Court.

In V. Bhagat vs. D. Bhagat (Mrs), (1994) 1 SCC 337 = AIR 1994 SC 710, this Court while allowing the marriage to dissolve on ground of mental cruelty and in view of the irretrievable breakdown of marriage and the peculiar circumstances of the case, held that the allegations of adultery against the wife were not proved thereby vindicating her honour and character. This Court while exploring the other alternative observed that the divorce petition has been pending for more than 8 years and a good part of the lives of both the parties has been consumed in this litigation and yet, the end is not in sight and that the allegations made against each other in the petition and the counter by the parties will go to show that living together is out of question and rapproachment is not in the realm of possibility. This Court at page 720 of AIR has observed thus:

"Before parting with this case, we think it necessary to append a clarification. Merely because there are allegations and counter allegations, a decree of divorce cannot follow. Nor is mere delay in disposal of the divorce proceedings by itself a ground. There must be really some extra- ordinary features to warrant grant of divorce on the basis of pleading (and other admitted material) without a full trial. Irretrievable breakdown of the marriage is not a ground by itself. But while scrutinising the evidence on record to determine whether the ground(s) alleged is/are made out and in determining the relief to be granted, the said circumstance can certainly be borne in mind. The unusual step as the one taken by us herein can be resorted to only to clear up an insoluable mess, when the Court finds it in the interest of both parties." The decision reported in Romesh Chander vs. Savitri AIR 1995 SC 851 = 1995 AIR SCW 647 is yet another case where this Court in its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution directed the dissolution of the marriage subject to the transfer of the house of the husband in the name of the wife. In that case, the parties had not enjoyed the company of each other as husband and wife for 25 years, this is the second round of litigation which routing through the trial court and the High Court has reached the Supreme Court. The appeal was based on cruelty. Both the Courts below have found that the allegation was not proved and consequently it could not be made the basis for claiming divorce. However, this Court after following the earlier decisions and in exercise of its power under Article 142 of the Constitution directed the marriage between the appellant and the respondent shall stand dissolved subject to the appellant transferring the house in the name of his wife within four months from the date of the order and the dissolution shall come into effect when the house is transferred and possession is handed over to the wife.

The facts and circumstances in the above three cases disclose that reunion is impossible. Our case on hand is one such. It is not in dispute that the appellant and the respondent are living away for the last 14 years. It is also true that a good part of the lives of both the parties has been consumed in this litigation. As observed by this Court, the end is not in sight. The assertion of the wife through her learned counsel at the time of hearing appears to be impractical. It is also a matter of record that dislike for each other was burning hot.

Before parting with this case, we think it necessary to say the following:

Marriages are made in heaven. Both parties have crossed the point of no return. A workable solution is certainly not possible. Parties cannot at this stage reconcile themselves and live together forgetting their past as a bad dream. We, therefore, have no other option except to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court and affirming the order of the Family Court granting decree for divorce. The Family Court has directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards permanent alimony to the respondent and pursuant to such direction the appellant had deposited the amount by way of bank draft. Considering the status of parties and the economic condition of the appellant who is facing criminal prosecution and out of job and also considering the status of the wife who is employed, we feel that a further sum of Rs. 1 lakh by way of permanent alimony would meet the ends of justice. This shall be paid by the appellant within 3 months from today by an account payee demand draft drawn in favour of the respondent  Arundhati Tripathy and the dissolution shall come into effect when the demand draft is drawn and furnished to the respondent.

In the result, the Civil Appeal is allowed. There will be no order as to costs.

---

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India).

CommonLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.commonlii.org/in/cases/INSC/2005/430.html

Will these corrupt advocates loose their licenses ?

BMW case: Will these corrupt advocates loose their licenses ?

While a lot is BEING GUESS AND WISHED in this article below, it remains to be seen if these corrupt advocates would loose their licenses

We heard of Corruption in Police....

We heard of Corruption in Judiciary ....

Now there is Corruption within advocates.....

So what is the Law and order situation turning into ??

News Item from TOI : BMW case: Anand, Khan could lose licenses
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/BMW_case_Anand_Khan_could_lose_licenses/articleshow/2088785.cms

31 May, 2007 l 1349 hrs IST lUmesh Kumar Singh/INDIATIMES NEWS NETWORK

The TV expose that showed two counsels, public prosecutor I U Khan and defence lawyer R K Anand, working in concert to prevent a key witness in the BMW case from deposing against the rich Sanjeev Nanda, is a fit case of professional misconduct and may invite suspension or revocation of the license of an advocate under the Advocates Act, 1961.

The discussions aired on television may not be taken as privileged communication between client and lawyer. The Advocates Act, 1961, empowers the Bar Council to take action against an advocate for professional misconduct. The Bar Council is empowered under Section 35 of the Act to punish advocates for professional misconduct.

The Act contains a detailed and complete mechanism for suspending or revoking the license of an advocate. A disciplinary committee of the state bar council hears the case of the advocate concerned and then can order punishment, which could be a reprimand, suspension from practice for such period it deems fit, or removal of the advocate's name from the state roll of advocates

The Bar would then initiate proceedings, and the advocate has a right to be heard before appropriate action is taken by the disciplinary committee. After such proceedings, the advocate may approach the Bar Council of India within 60 days, and if the council upholds the action, can appeal to the Supreme Court.

Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court. This Section confers upon the court appellate jurisdiction. If the matter has been reported to the bar and it does not take any action, the court may take up the matter.

P H Parikh, president, Supreme Court Bar Association, is non-committal on the issue. He plays the safe, saying: "After the summer vacations, the matter may be discussed in the executive, only then we can decide the course of action."

"A lawyer should maintain the highest values in the profession and should follow the ethics and standards set by the legal luminaries," he adds.

Any act of an advocate which shatters the faith and confidence of the people can be seen as a case of professional misconduct. Misconduct is a sufficiently wide expression and it is not necessary that it should involve moral turpitude.

Any conduct which in any way renders a man unfit for the exercise of his profession or is likely to hamper or embarrass the administration of justice may be considered to be misconduct calling for disciplinary action.

In this case, if the charges are found true, they will invite disciplinary action. It cannot be said that an advocate can never be punished for professional misconduct committed by him in his personal capacity.

Is the Indian criminal justice system corrupt and rotten ?

Comments to the news item below : The recent NDTV Expose of the BMW case has shown a prosecution lawyer scheming to remove a key witness from a criminal trial i.e. Save a criminal !!!

In 1999 six people are killed in a blood chilling accident. All but one witness turn hostile. The lone witness is ALSO DROPPED by the Prosecution (state ) itself !!!!

Initially the Public prosecutor drops the NON HOSTILE witness. Later when the court includes the witness, the witness is offered money to change his testimony. NDTV records the whole issue on hidden cameras.

Harassed Husbands charged in false dowry cases have often been at the receiving end of corrupt Law and order machinery

Here is one more case of complete corruption where the state prosecutor is colluding to save an accused !!!!!

The news is found all over the web :

http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=238790

http://www.hindustantimes.com/storypage/storypage.aspx?id=d5799b0c-acc4-4235-af07-5c32182ecedc&&Headline=EMNDTV%2fEM+sting+on+legal+nexus+in+BMW+case

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070013915

http://www.ibnlive.com/news/bmw-case-delhi-police-drops-lawyer/41781-3.html

Stung lawyers in BMW case run for cover

CNN-IBN

Posted Thursday , May 31, 2007 at 11:47Updated Thursday , May 31, 2007 at 12:38

STUNG AND STUNNED: A sting op exposes how lawyers joined hands to bail out Sanjeev Nanda.

New Delhi: The Delhi Police on Thursday dropped Public Prosecutor I U Khan from the high-profile BMW hit-and-run case a day after the nexus between him and defence lawyer RK Anand was exposed in a sting operation conducted by one of the witnesses Sunil Kulkarni.

Police have written to the Delhi Government recommending that Khan be dropped from the case. "We have suggested to the government to replace the public prosecutor in the BMW case," Police Commissioner K K Paul was quoted as saying.

Sources tell CNN-IBN that senior public prosecutor Rajeev Mohan is likely to replace Khan.

In 1999 six people were run over, allegedly by a BMW driven by young industrialist Sanjeev Nanda, grandson of a former Navy chief.

Kulkarni was a passerby who saw the accident and is the only witness not to have turned hostile.

On Wednesday, a TV sting exposed Khan colluding with Anand to bail out main accused Sanjeev Nanda.

The expose was allegedly done by Kulkarni himself using a hidden camera.

The video shows defence lawyer RK Anand meeting Kulkarni and asking him not to depose against the accused.

Stung and stunned

Anand refuted all allegations against him and said his slate was clear. "I have nothing to hide. I am not involved in any of this. The way NDTV has shown all this is out of context. When he (Kulkarni) came to me at the airport, there were only two ways I could have reacted. One: I get the police, two: I ask him to get back to me later or simply answer his question. I was to catch a flight and I spoke with him about the cash in a sacracstic manner just to ward him off," Anand said.

Anand also denied having met Kulkarni after he "bumped into him" at the airport . "Someone else must be recording the footage. It's got nothing to do with me," he said adding Kulkarni had a "dubious past" and his antecedents needed to be examined.

Shock and outrage

The expose and the Delhi Police action has sparked off a flurry of reactions from the judicial fraternity.

Former chief justice of India Rajinder Sachar said the expose was shocking and needs to be taken very seriously. "If sting operations disclose such kind of things, FIRs must be lodged. All this should be taken note of by Bar Council or judicial the fraternity," Sachar told CNN-IBN.

Senior advocate K T S Tulsi said the "stream of judiciary" had been polluted. "Some court could take suo motu cognisanze of the matter. The stream of justice polluted by the very people who are to protect it. Bar association could also move but these are criminal offences. The fact that senior lawyers are involved is simply shocking," he said.

Neelam Katara who has been fighting for justice in the long-drawn Nitish Katara murder case said it was the first step in the journey towards justice. "It's heartening to see representatives from the public coming forward for justice. The key witness in my case too was direct influence of the accused. It's only when people come forward can justice be ensured," she said.

THE CASE SO FAR

On January 10, 1999, six people were run over, allegedly by a BMW driven by young industrialist Sanjeev Nanda.

Nanda is a Delhi businessman, son of an influential arms dealer and the grandson of former Navy chief.

Six persons, including three policemen, were killed in the incident that had occurred at Lodhi Road in the capital.

Three youths including prime accused Sanjeev Nanda, grandson of former Admiral S M Nanda, are facing trial in the case.

Others who have been chargesheeted are his friend Manik Kapur and Siddharth Gupta, who were allegedly accompanying him in his car.

Prosecution alleged that Nanda, who was at the wheel, was drunk along with his friends.

Sunil Kulkarni, who was named as an eyewitness to the accident, retracted from his statement by saying that it was not a BMW but a speeding truck that mowed down the victims.

Kulkarni is the only one so far who has not turned hostile in the case. Earlier witnesses had changed their statement to say that a truck and not a car had run over the people.

Kulkarni says he was walking on South Delhi's Lodhi Road on the fateful night when he saw a black car hit a police picket and then crash into a group of people who were sitting around a fire.

Three people came out of the car after that and one of them was Sanjeev Nanda. Then one of them said: 'Sanj lets get out of here', and they fled the scene.

Kulkarni said he could not see the driver due to blinding headlights. In the second round of questioning, he claimed that he had heard someone say 'Sanj' instead of 'Sanjeev', as he had claimed last time - an anomaly which the defence will try and exploit.

Two other witnesses, Manoj Malik and Harishankar, the petrol pump attendant who had called up the Police Control Room, have already turned hostile in the case. Malik had told the court that it was a truck, not a car, which killed the people.

In April 2007, the Delhi High Court had issued notice to the Delhi police to explain why Sunil Kulkarni, the prosecution witness in the 1999 BMW hit and run case should be brought back to Delhi from Mumbai.

Post your comments to show your fury against this dysfunctional system

Scheming

Scheming (Indian) wife and daughter plan murder

27 May, 2007 l 1024 hrs ISTl IANS

LONDON: Three people of Indian origin, including the scheming wife and daughter of Coventry-based Jaskarnjit Singh Sanghera, have been convicted of conspiring to murder him and have begun prison sentences. In a sensational case involving hired assaulters, Sanghera was assaulted repeatedly on two occasions but managed to survive with partial disability on one side of his body.

In what is reported as a real-life drama, on the night of 2 November 2005, Sanghera, 42, went to bed as usual with his wife, Balwinder, at their home in Coventry. At 2.20 am his front door was smashed in and a knifeman burst into the bedroom before stabbing him 25 times.

He suffered serious injuries, but survived. It was the second time within months he had been stabbed. After the second attack, Balwinder, 40, told the police that she suspected that the attacks could have been linked to a land dispute in India, and even suggested that it was connected to a woman with whom Sanghera had an affair with a long time ago.

But the Coventry police became suspicious, and found Balwinder had run up debts of about pounds 50,000 that her husband knew nothing about, and had taken out a life insurance policy in his name. She also took out a loan of pounds 8,000 in the weeks before the attempt on his life in November. The police believe that the money was used to pay a hit man. After a huge inquiry, the police charged Balwinder with organising the attacks.

The police also found her daughter, Amrita, 20, and her boyfriend, Inderpal Singh Dail, 23, had conspired with her. The trio, who pleaded guilty to conspiring to murder Sanghera, were jailed last week for 10, eight, and five years respectively.

However, the Coventry Evening Telegraph, a local newspaper, reported that the true motive of the assault on Sanghera remains a mystery.

Detective Chief Inspector Nav Malik of Warwickshire Police, who led the inquiry, said: "It could be debt that motivated it but what does come out is she (wife) clearly wants him (husband) dead. The people who are ultimately responsible for committing the attack itself, we don't know who they are. The case will not be closed until we get to grips with who they are."

"He (Sanghera, the Husband) still remains partially paralysed to his left-hand side. And he's now realised the total betrayal by his wife and daughter. He is devastated by the betrayal," said Malik.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Scheming_wife_and_daughter_plan_murder/articleshow/2077357.cms

Score: Men zero, women one.....Are you ready for the surname game?

Score: Men zero, women one.....

Are you ready for the surname game?

24 May, 2007 l 0451 hrs IST Smita Khanna

THE name game has some new players on the field and they've given the ball a real hard kick. And guess what? It's a goal! Score: Men zero, women one. So who was saying it's the woman who must change her surname once she's married? They could take a look at the scoreboard, thank you very much. And for those who missed the game, here's a recap – the California Legislative Assembly has recently passed a bill saying that men can now take on their wife's surname after marriage. Aha!

Some might argue that they've always been people like Swaminathan S Anklesaria Aiyar (who uses his wife's name), Shaad Ali Sehgal (who uses his mother's maiden name) and Sanjay Leela Bhansali (who also uses his mother Leela's name.) There are also certain ethnic groups like the Nairs down south who follow such matrilineal traditions. But let's get realistic folks – they are a minority. The rest would rather stick by the rules. But things seem to be poised for change with this new bill. So would Indian men be game for such a thing? "Why not?" retorts Prof Rakesh Chandra, Director, Institute for Women's Studies, Lucknow University, and adds, "if a man can get his wife, lover or girlfriend's name engraved on a bracelet or pendant, why not add it to his own?" Interestingly, while Chandra thinks it a "progressive idea which would 'tokenistically' break the gender barrier," hailing it as a step further in the women's lib movement would be akin to "over-reading" it, he thinks.

An observation that doesn't seem so out of place in the light of what Mona Singh aka Jassi, the fiercely independent plain Jane of Indian television, has to say. "I would want my man to be a man, so his taking on my surname would be a no-no. In any case, it's difficult to imagine Indian men doing such a thing," says a cynical Singh, quite contrary to what a clearly upbeat Dolly Thakore thinks. Says the well-known theatreperson who incidentally retains her maiden name, "It's about acknowledging that women are men's equal, if not their superior. Young people today have an open mind and may not be totally averse to the idea."

Thakore's opinion is reflected in author Sunny Singh's attitude too. "If a man wanted to take on my name, why should it be an issue? Besides, given the social conditions in India, a lot of us marry people with the same last name anyway – a few of my relatives for example, have no other last name beyond Singh," says Sunny.

But before you start flinging your surname at your spouse like a well-aimed connubial missile, Shraboni Sinha's point of view is worth an audience: "Why have a surname at all? It only serves to denote your religious and caste identity and has no real purpose. I think everyone should restrict its use for legal purposes alone," says this member of a forum which argues that surnames are not required because they are discriminatory.

Not that television show host and comedian Cyrus Sahukar, who thinks he has "a weird surname" would agree. For this man at least, the option of using the misses' surname could actually be a relief "for people with hideous surnames. Imagine marrying someone called Mr Batliwala! Who wants to be stuck with such a name? I think it would be a better option to take on your wife's surname if it sounds better than that. And then the children could use either of the names or a combo a la Brangelina," says an excited Sahukar giving the idea a thumbs up. What's in a name you say? Ask Mr Batliwala!

Ex-Delhi cop on run after bahu’s death

<html>

<b> Ex-Delhi cop on run after bahu's death</b>

Comments : I do NOT know who is right and who is wrong in this case,
but I suppose it is the same fate for everyone - cop or common man

What is happening to my punya bhumii ? India is turning into a
battlefield with both sexes aligned on opposing sides

The ARREST BEFORE ANY QUESTIONS law is making the place a graveyard

regards
Vinayak

====================== news item =====================

<h1>Dowry killing? Ex-Delhi cop on run after bahu's death</h1>

<B>Ghaziabad Police arrest retired inspector's wife, son, daughter
from Vasundhara home</B>

<B>Express News Service</B>

Ghaziabad, May 30: A Retired Delhi Police inspector is absconding
after his daughter-in-law was allegedly murdered over dowry demands on
Tuesday morning in Ghaziabad's upscale Vasundhara locality.

<B>The Ghaziabad police arrested retired Inspector Vaidhnath Singh's
wife Gandeshwari Devi, daughter Renu and son Gautam Anand from their
Sector-15 Vasundhara house at 5 am today.</B>

The deceased, who was a housewife, was 26.

The postmortem report reveals Manju might have been strangled and the
hung from the ceiling fan with a chunni, apparently to make it look
like a suicide, the police said.

According to the victim's father Tara Chandra, her in-laws were
harassing Manju over dowry ever since her marriage with Gautam in
2004.

The birth of a daughter, Eshu, last year only compounded matters, said
Chandra, who stays in Delhi's Nabi Karim area.

Gautam works as a manager in a private company in Ghaziabad, the
victim's family said.

The police said they found the bill of a refrigerator from the
Vasundhara house; Manju's family bought the refrigerator last week.
Chandra claimed he had bought it for her daughter after repeated
demands of her in-laws.

"Inspector (Vaidhnath) Singh retired two months ago from Delhi Police
and had told me then that he can get away with anything," Chandra
said. "He said he is very influential."

Asserting that it was not a suicide, Chandra said: "Manju's height was
not proportionate to the fan's height. I got a call from Gautam at 11
am yesterday. All that he said was Manju was dead.

"I found her body hanging from the fan when I reached their house. The
whole family had fled by then."

The Indirapuram police in Ghaziabad say they got information that some
family members had returned home last night, and the police raided the
house early this morning. "They have been sent to jail and an FIR on
charges of dowry death has been lodged," Indirapuram Station House
Officer Chotte Ram said.

<A HREF="http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=238794">http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=238794

</html>

HC issues notice to Centre to block web contents

<b>HC issues notice to Centre to block web contents</b>

Friends

This is Good and bad news

Good news because Indians are waking up to the powers of the net and
India as a country is standing up to Google (since Google needs India
now)

However the bad news is that this is stifling freedom and could set up
a bad precedent. Who's next to bee stifled by GOI ? Will the big
brother go on a overdrive ?

What has the GOI done on all the pornography, gambling and crime on the web ?

What about yellow journalism in the media

Why only the net is curtailed suddenly ?

Request your view on this

Regards
Vinayak

======================= news item ==============================

<h1>HC issues notice to Centre to block web contents</h1>

Bangalore, May 31, 2007

First Published: 03:57 IST(31/5/2007)

Last Updated: 03:59 IST(31/5/2007)

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday issued notices to the Centre and
some internet service providers on a public interest litigation
seeking a direction to the government to take necessary steps to block
web contents on the internet which "offended and denigrated Indian
values".

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Cyriac Joseph and Justice B
S Patil issued the notices to the Centre, Internet Service Providers
Association of India, US-based Youtube Inc and Google and Google-India
based in the city in response to the PIL filed by Bangalore-based
Digital Society Foundation.

The petitioner not only sought blocking of web contents which were "an
insult to Indian nationhood", but also asked for formulation of an
appropriate scheme or body to prevent illegal hosting of video
clippings on the internet.

In his petition, the petitioner alleged that internet, which had
become a tool for facilitating e-commerce, was also "leading to some
illegal and criminal activities violating the rights of others".

Warning against the use of internet for "waging Cyber terror with the
intention of causing harm and loss to one and all", the petitioner
claimed it was necessary to have a separate legislation to control and
regulate cyber world.

The United Nations has notified a model law, known as "Uncitral Model
Law" to regulate transactions on the internet, based on which
Parliament passed the Information Technology Act, 2000, the foundation
said.

<A HREF="http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=0823b75e-860f-4766-8494-81d78880c957&&Headline=HC+issues+notice+to+Centre+to+block+web+contents">http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=0823b75e-860f-4766-8494-81d78880c957&&Headline=HC+issues+notice+to+Centre+to+block+web+contents

or

<A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/2l849m">http://tinyurl.com/2l849m

====================================================================================
====================================================================================

Govt. of India earns from Men and spends on Women

1. Government of India collects MOST OF ITS taxes from men - for men are the ones who are still EMPLOYED IN GREATER NUMBERS IN THE ORGANISED SECTOR, where bulk of the taxes are collected !!!!

2. Still Govt. of India spends HARDLY ANYTHING ON MEN welfare

3. The government spends a lot on women and child welfare

4. There is a separate Arm of the Govt. of India for women and child welfare

5. Men are left high and dry ...ALMOST ....

6. I am NOT against women welfare " .... BUT WHY NOT MEN's WELFARE as well ? ...", is my humble question


>BSNL Bangalore website includes a "Helpline"
>in which there are tel. nos. of Women's
>organization and Children's home, NOT SIF.
>
>Senior members, please take some initiatives
>to request the BSNL Bangalore to put SIF help
>line as well.


7. Most Telephone service providers have been asked to allocate incoming free, rent free !! telephone lines for women in every major town, city and metro !!!

8. So this IS the case NOT just in Bangalore BUT AS WELL in every state capital, second level cities and even smaller towns


GENDER SENSITIZATION

9. The challenge is the make men NOT HIT BY 498A, realise the seriousness of the FALSE 498A and DV act threat

10. This includes a majority of our ministers and MPs and MLAs to say the least !!!!

11. While women have united and rallied for their rights, men are yet to do so and get hit by a multitude of Wife biased laws like the DV act


Regards
Vinayak



My post above is Subject to

1. My idea of *self help* which is very essential : http://tinyurl.com/pxcfz
2. Standard disclaimers as in http://tinyurl.com/947u9
3. A short preamble : http://tinyurl.com/hatew


>
>BSNL-SIF Bangalore Helpline
>Wed May 30, 2007 3:59 am (PST)
>
>Friends
>
>BSNL Bangalore website includes a "Helpline"
>in which there are tel. nos. of Women's
>organization and Children's home, NOT SIF.
>
>Senior members, please take some initiatives
>to request the BSNL Bangalore to put SIF help
>line as well.
>
>This is very much needed as like other help
>lines.
>
>Regards

Advice Please - 1

Advice Please - _____ (Harassed Hubby) - _____ , India

498A Date: __/___ /2007
Any Other IPCs: 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act
Relatives Accused: Whole family plus my wife's mause and mausa
Jailed Days: NO
Stage of Case: negotiation
Spent Money on 498A: 60,000/-
Lived in joint Family: YES
Marriage Date: ___/___/2004
Wife Age: 28
Wife's Education Level: studying
Wife works (earns)?: doesNotWork
Filed for Divorce: NO
Have children: YES
Living With Wife: NO
Negotiating with Wife: NO
Took her Stridhan Back: YES
She had Any Medical Problems: NO
Willing to Help other Victims: YES
Ready for TV/Press Interivew : YES
Contact No:
Comments:

Hi, am _____ aged 31 and my wife 28, have a son 1½ yrs old! my marriage completed 3+ years; out of which we are separated for 1½ yrs now.

I got married on___/___/2004; problems started arising immediately after due to all the reasons many of which are already mentioned in various cases posted on your site (You have 26 reasons of common causes for marital strife in your report “A COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON THE MISUSE OF ANTI-DOWRY LAWS IN MARITAL DISPUTES”, 16 are applicable in my case)!

On __/ Mid /2005 our son was born!

On End 2005, she left my house with her cousin and maternal uncle, only to return on Early ___ 2006, just for Two / three weeks, that too when I 100% compromised from my side single handedly!

All my thoughts/ compromise, everything shattered in just Two / three weeks when her uncle (chacha) took her away on ___ March 2006, making me and my family, swallow every ounce of bloodied stomach acid he and his niece had.

I knew she never cared for me, but I became restless when I came to know that she has left my 1½ year old son, like an orphan, with her mother, in _____(UP), and left for ______ (a city in another state) to do MBA!

I made all possible social attempts to have them back or atleast have my son back, to look after him; he was neither getting father nor mother! When all my social attempts failed, I went to court and filed two cases:

1) U/s 9, Hindu Marriage Act, dated Dec ____ 2006, for restoration of conjugal rights!

2) U/s 25, Wards & Guardianship Act, dated Dec ___ /2006, to get my son’s custody!

On this my in-laws started threatening me of dire consequences if I do not take back these cases! Instead of coming under their pressure I filed a complaint:

3) Complaint on
Jan ___ 2007, to DM (___City in UP),
IG (______ City in UP Zone),
SSP (______ City in UP),
SO (P.S. ______, ______ City in UP),
regarding the threats being given to me!

When none of the authorities considered my application worth reacting, I filed another case:

4) U/s 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC, dated February _____ 2007!

And as a result I came to know that on March ____ 2007 an FIR No. _____ (P.S. _____ Nagar, ______ City in UP) has been filed against me and my family u/s 498A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act.

Here, it is pertinent to mention that the list of accused include 10 persons; me, my father & mother, my two married sisters and their husbands, my younger brother and MY WIFE’S REAL MAUSI AND MAUSA (her mother’s real sister and her husband); I know they do not share cordial relations but fail to understand how can they be framed in dowry case?

I approached _______ (The state's) High Court, got arrest stayed for 7 out of10 accused, but court denied mine and my parents’.

On ____ April 2007 I took back my cases as the result of the so called compromise reached with my in-laws (just the compulsion was to avoid my parents being harassed)!

I also agreed to pay them money they asked for!

This gives me the realization as to how one feels when you have to kiss a person who has his feet on your throat!

Final Report is being placed in the FIR as so called compromise is reached! It is yet to be accepted by court!

Please advise what course of action I should take to get rid of my wife!

Questions for new victims

Dear Sir / Madam


In case you have been or are about to be charged with a FALSE dowry case, Please take a few minutes to fill in this questionnaire and return the same to me

This forum is meant for victims of Dowry Law misuse. Vengeful women with a view to malign their in laws have instigated 1000s of false DOWRY cases. Innocent parents, elderly women (mothers in law), sisters and relatives have been falsely charged under these cases. 1000s of families are stuck with FALSE cases filed under section 498A of Indian Penal code. This forum is a meeting place for such victims.

IF YOU ARE VICTIM OF FALSE DOWRY CASES, you are welcome to this group / message board.

!!!!Do NOT POST REPLIES HERE !!!!!!

Please fill in this questionnaire and mail replies to:
Address 1 or Address 2


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Brief Personal Data


1. Name (Assumed name is fine for privacy):

2. E-mail address (must be reachable, authentic):

3. Contact numbers [if you wish to give them]:

4. Location (NRI, please identify country. NO other detail required at this stage):

5. Willing to be contact for other victims (We have effective self help groups at some locations. local people may call you) (Yes/No):


Brief case history and family data


6. Was yours a joint family (parents or any other family member lived together):

7. Do you have kids (how many, their age when she left and filed 498a):

8. Are you Still negotiating or talking with wife or her relatives (Yes/No):

9. 498a / dowry case registered (Yes/No), if yes, please provide month and year :
- Month + year of filing :
- Place of filing 498A :
- Present status : Is the FIR filed ? have you taken anticipatory bail etc ?
- People accused [more details sought below] :

10. 498a registered at the place of residence or at in-laws place:

10.1. Have you checked the validity of Jurisdiction when the 498a case was filed ? :

Please ref. this case for understanding Jurisdiction
Y. Abraham Ajith & Ors. Vs Inspector of Police, Chennai & Anr.

11. Have You or anyone named in 498a spent time in jail (who, how many days):

12. Number, list of people other than family members named in the 498a [because there have been some strange cases life this !!] :

13. Are any aged people named in the FIR ? Are any remote relatives named in the FIR ?

14. Are parents also implicated in the FIR (Yes/No):

14.1. Has the police done an inquiry and have they filed a charge sheet or final report ?

15. Is the 498a Case in court (If yes, how long, month and year):

16. Wife suffering from any disease (IF YES, do you have medical proof):

17. Marriage date (month and year):

18. Her age when she filed 498a (years):

19. Has she taken back all her stuff (stridhan, jewelry):

19.1. Do you have proof of her taking back all her Stridhan Jewellery, gifts etc

19.2. Has she taken away any of your property ?

19.3. In any of the complaints has she claimed that stridhan property is still with you ?

20. Have you filed for divorce ? If so where ? in Family court of Judicial Magistrate court ?

20.1. We generally advice victims NOT to file for DIVORCE. Here is why

Maintenance related :


21. Has your wife claimed maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act ? i.e. is there ANY CIVIL CASE in a marriage court or magistrate court or high court for divorce or for alimony ?

22. Sometimes women claim INTERIM maintenance. Has she claimed INTERIM maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act ?

23. If such a case has been filed, Have you started fighting your maintenance case ?

24. Is your wife employed ? if yes do you have proof of the same ?

25. Does your wife have proof of your employment ?

26. In case you are employed abroad, do you have property that your wife may try to attach, should you NOT pay maintenance ?

27. Any other issues that you wish to share with us



------------
regards, vinayak

My post above is Subject to
----------------------------
1. My idea of *self help* which is very essential : http://tinyurl.com/pxcfz
2. Standard disclaimers as in http://tinyurl.com/947u9
3. A short preamble : http://tinyurl.com/hatew

Dowry Law Misuse : http://tinyurl.com/tdkx6 , http://tinyurl.com/v5vp8

Groups :

http://groups.google.com/group/MatriSuggest
http://groups.google.com/group/SIFsuggest


Blogs :

http://bareact.blogspot.com/2006/12/divorce-why-now.html
http://tinyurl.com/2tb3s7
http://tinyurl.com/2dkub4
http://tinyurl.com/23xppp

http://vinayak.jconserv.net/index.php

http://www.bloglines.com/blog/eVinayak
http://bareact.blogspot.com/
http://my2cw.blogspot.com/
http://o3.indiatimes.com/mera/
http://www.blurty.com/users/vinayak/

Seek advise : All India contact Nos : http://tinyurl.com/vntjz

More on the mediation process ...

Dear Brother

>On my date of RCR on ___ / __, opposite party
>started demanding reconcilliation in mediation
>cell although the case was at the stage of
>"petitioners wittnesses".

This is pure delay tactics and should be pointed out to the judge. Most probably the judge told you that you are being referred to mediation and not know what that meant, you accepted to the process. Well past is past. So now please read further ...

>I just want to know, what type of report in
>the end 'mediation cell' could give out. Does
>this report reveal who is at fault or some
>other true facts (except those written in the
>petition and reply to petitions)?


Every party going for mediation is entitled to know about the mediation proceess AT OR BEFORE the start of mediation

Advocates are NOT permitted into the Mediation center IF PARTIES object. for e.g. if you object, both advocates have to wait outside. So use that facility IF you are very sure of the law and are more confident than your wife.

At the beginning of the mediation please ask the following questions VERY POLITELY, TO THE MEDIATORS

1. What is the evidenciary value of mediation ? [we know the answer, but still ask]

2. Can the proceedings in mediations, facts that have come out in Mediation be used in the case [we know the answer, but still ask]

3. If at the end of the mediation, if both parties do NOT COME to an agreement [ please note I am NOT saying both parties should start living together...] I am just saying both parties do NOT come to an agreement, what happens ? ask this question as well, though we know the answer

The idea here is to set the scene and clear the ground and make the mediator aware that you are aware thru his statements

Do NOT act like a lawyer. Act like a loving husband, ... A dutyfull son, an honest citizen etc etc etc ...but do NOT give in to blackmail


Now let me answer your questions
==================================================

ref here for more on mediation process

http://evinayak.rediffiland.com/scripts/xanadu_diary_view.php?postId=1180330765
or
http://tinyurl.com/22245j

Mediation can be one sitting or multiple sittings. Many times it is more than one sitting.

If the mediation failed the mediators are supposed to refer the case back to court !!! that's all. BUT PLEASE READ THIS WHOLE NOTE AND POST QUESTIONS IF ANY before you jump into a mediation

>If i _indirectly_ say in the mediation cell
>that there are no chances of further
>reconcilliation, will it be negative for my
>case.

again !!!!!! please note MEDIATION IS NOT RECONCILIATION.

COUNSELLING IS AIMED AT RECONCILIATION - i.e. living together blah blah

MEDIATION IS AIMED AT SETTLEMENT. Settlement may be that both of you break away - AS WELL !!!!. This is a subtle difference NOT told to you even by many lawyers.

In addition to above : Some important thing(s) to remember in mediation

- DO NOT RELEASE all your trump cards. Proceedings in mediation are NOT of evidentiary value later. So do NOT release your trump cards.

- Observe the opponent

- Take time to expose the oppponents lies

- for e.g. a cruel wife, a wife who tried suicide and tried to frame the hubby, may come to mediation and fall at the hubby's feet and seek marital life from that date. Politely remind the mediators the terror you went thru when she gave you the suicide threats...

- seek proof where necessary. For e.g. if wife says you are earining a million, seek proof

- when wife counters stating "..what are you earning then .." , counter her politely that you are NOT ready to discuss that as she is NO longer living with you as a LOVING wife...but she is an opponent in a legal case !!

- YOU DO NOT HAVE TO ACCEPT / AGREE TO A SETTLEMENT in one go. Do NOT do that mistake. As an NRI I was hoodwinked on that aspect

and so on ......

>I just want to know, what type of report in
>the end 'mediation cell' could give out.
[.......]
>My lawyer says there is nothing to worry here
>just pass time, the final report of the
>mediation cell will be either "Mediation
>successfull" or "Mediation Failed".

That is right (mostly I'd say),

An addendum : If mediation succeeded, terms of compromise may also be drafted and signed between parties

>case. My oppsite party is behaving very polite
>and humble in mediation cell and demanding that
>other members of my family should also be
>called in the mediation cell.


as long as other members of your family are NOT parties to your case they need not attend mediation

More parties, more the mess. Try and limit the crowd. Do NOT make it a Saas Bahu (MIL / DIL ) TV serial.

Read ....read... read... the archives here and blogs. Arm yourself with legal points and approach the case with great mental strength


regards, vinayak

My post above is Subject to
----------------------------
1. My idea of *self help* which is very essential : http://tinyurl.com/pxcfz
2. Standard disclaimers as in http://tinyurl.com/947u9
3. A short preamble : http://tinyurl.com/hatew



>
>Hello Everybody,
>
>On my date of RCR on ___ / __, opposite party
>started demanding reconcilliation in mediation
>cell although the case was at the stage of
>"petitioners wittnesses".
>
>After initial talks with me & her the judge
>refferred our case to mediation cell on 28th
>may and the judge at the mediation center tried
>to reconcile.
>
>I just want to know, what type of report in
>the end 'mediation cell' could give out. Does
>this report reveal who is at fault or some
>other true facts (except those written in the
>petition and reply to petitions)?
>
>My lawyer says there is nothing to worry here
>just pass time, the final report of the
>mediation cell will be either "Mediation
>successfull" or "Mediation Failed".
>
>If i _indirectly_ say in the mediation cell
>that there are no chances of further
>reconcilliation, will it be negative for my
>case. My oppsite party is behaving very polite
>and humble in mediation cell and demanding that
>other members of my family should also be
>called in the mediation cell.
>
>Anybody having experience of mediation cell
>please give ur inputs. People having experience
>at mediation center at Delhi please give
>me ur contact numbers, i would just like to
>discuss my case with u.
>
>
>Harassed hubby

Men caught in the Act?

Men caught in the Act?
28 May, 2007 l 0011 hrs ISTlSmita Khanna/TIMES NEWS NETWORK

The first prosecution under the Domestic Violence Act may have come through, but what's worrying legal experts is not the need for more laws to protect women.

Salman Khan wasn't crooning Shaadi kar ke phas gaye yaar, for nothing, you know. Those ludicrous tales of the misses running after the hapless hubby with the belan aren't as unrealistic as they sound. While there have been some lone voices beginning to take up the battle for the victimised pati post the Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961, Section 498 (a) seems to have become a rapier some women love to brandish. even as legal experts collectively frown at how the law is often misused to implicate innocent men and their families, the frown just got deeper post the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, (DVA) 2005. While the first prosecution under the Act just came through, men's organisations and lawyers alike are wondering if the belan just became a baton.

For the likes of Sachit Dalal, project manager with a software firm in Delhi at least, the hits just keep on coming. Admittedly, a victim of "legal terrorism", for Dalal these laws spell bad news. "Feminists and women's organisations keep throwing these laws at men's faces, but what about those thousands of cases where men are abused? Why are there no laws supporting men?" he questions.

While Dalal also cites a WHO report which talks about financial abuse of in-laws by the bahu to fortify his cause, Swarup Sarkar, founder member and coordinator, Save Indian Family, thinks that this isn't a fight between men and women, but between families. "Statistics reveal that only two per cent of the cases of harassment filed by women are genuine and there are several reasons for this," says Sarkar even as he elaborates: "Extra-marital affairs, the husband's inability to provide enough money etc lead women to exploit these laws to get their way around."

Agrees Pratima Gupta, an advocate practicing in the Delhi High Court, "There is no doubt that only two or three per cent of the cases of harassment coming to court are genuine. These laws are being used as tools of mal-adjustment. If you want to keep a marriage going, small things don't matter, but they get blown out of proportion if one wants to break free. Unfortunately, when you are unable to split gracefully, you use Section 498!"

Perhaps it is things like these that have led Sarkar to demand that the DVA be made "gender neutral" and be termed as the Domestic Harmony Act.

Not that women's rights activist Shalini Mathur, founder of Suraksha, would agree. According to Mathur, "These laws cannot be gender neutral, because our society is not gender neutral. Has a man ever been hanged for killing his wife?"

"The ordinary man is not a criminal," retorts RP Chuge, lawyer, practicing in the Supreme Court and a member of Protect Indian Family. While Chuge reveals that he has been abused by his wife and is himself a "victim", it doesn't deter him from saying, "Women should be protected, but that doesn't mean that they will use these laws to threaten men."

Time the legal eagles sorted things out, don't you think?

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/City_Supplements/Lucknow_Times/Men_caught_in_the_Act/articleshow/2077692.cms

Beware of Marketing Advocates

Posted by: "m.r. gupta"

Dear friends,

All mumbai sif members who hired services of some advocates have complaint against them and are totally dissatisfied with their services and have reported that they never attend crucial dates.

It is observed that some lawyers are using various tactics to attract rich clients and are interested only upto making 'petition' for anything 10K to 30+K and 500 to 2K for per appearance. But as appearance charge are not attractive compare to making 'ONLY PETITION', they do not take interest in appearance and then we have to suffer. Please beware of such advocates and report the group about such advocates so that others could be cautioned in time.

Some advocates in the name of social service are luring unsuspecting sufferers/group members to appear for interviews with them and make CDs for their own marketing.

M.R. GUPTA
PROTECT INDIAN FAMILY FOUNDATION

Mediation : Value of mediation proceedings as evidence

>"a counsellor appointed by the court for
>counselling in the DV case will not be bound by
>evidence act, cpc or crpc" !!!
>[..........]
>"the record of counselling proceedings shall not
>be deemed to be material on record in the case"
>[..........]
>Isn't this an encouragement for vexatious
>petitions with the help of one sided laws

Reply

1. At present, some Matrimonial Laws in India are one sided. There is NO denying that. Men have to endeavour to change them. SIF , 498 org , mynation etc are the first steps. We need to proceed further.

2. The DV act is a family breaker. No denying that

3. The DV act seems to be using SHE all over the mediation provisions. Having only women as mediators makes me feel agast. There seems to be no future for litigating men.


Having said all this let me add the following below

>"the record of counselling proceedings shall not
>be deemed to be material on record in the case"

4. Even now under the Family courts, mediation centers have been set up

5. these mediations centers act in a very similar way. Proceedings in mediation / mediation cell cannot be used as evidence elsewhere. Just for your info, mediation is practiced all over the world. To the best of my knowledge the Indian Mediation has drawn from the British system.

>
>what is the intent of all this?
>

6. One intent is to reduce the burden on the judiciary. In a country with a billion GENERALLY LAW ABIDING people the incidence of murder rape etc - as a % of the population is generally low. With the present police force and courts and juges, the law and order machiney CAN NOT cope with EVEN that. But practically EVER EIGHTH OR EVERY TENTH household is turning into a battlefiled on matrimonial cases (the number could be higher in some cities). The Family courts have huge backlogs .... running to years. So the judiciary wishes to settle matters OUTSIDE the evidence, inquiry .... trial process , but under the supervision of the court. IMHO, this is the overriding intent. However I agree that this intent MAY BE misused.


>Is this logically possible? some one not bound
>by crpc and evidence act?

7. Let us say YOU are the mediator in a family fued. You try to reason out. During the discussions, say for e.g. One of the parties doesn't shut up and keeps on talking. In frustration you tell him "..shut up you fool..". Do you, as a mediator, wished to get sued for slander, indecent behaviour etc etc ??? because of this "..shut up you fool..". The idea of absolving the mediator of criminal liabilities and burden of evidence is to let the mediator act with freedom. However I agree that this liberty / protection to mediators MAY also BE misused. Especially if the govt. plans to have just women as mediators.


Regards
Vinayak


>
>Who is not bound by evidence act in court proceedings?
>Sun May 27, 2007 1:17 am (PST)
>
>Hi
>
>As per the notification under the DV act,
>
>"a counsellor appointed by the court for
>counselling in the DV case will not be bound by
>evidence act, cpc or crpc" !!!
>
>" she shall only strive for bringing an end to
>domestic violence to the satisfaction of the
>aggrieved person"
>
>"the record of counselling proceedings shall not
>be deemed to be material on record in the case"
>
>what is the intent of all this?
>
>Is this logically possible? some one not bound
>by crpc and evidence act?
>
>Isn't this an encouragement for vexatious
>petitions with the help of one sided laws
>
>

Ex VC's Daughter slaps Dowry case on her hubby, 13 years after marriage

Son-in-law of Ex-VC Dr. Rudrappa held for dowry

Mysore, May 22 (BLU&MRS)- The Women Police arrested this morning the son-in-law of former Mysore University Vice-Chancellor Dr. Y.P. Rudrappa in an alleged dowry harassment case.

Dr. Y. Venkatesh, Reader in the Department of Library Sciences, Manasagangotri, was arrested in his Gangotri quarters with the assistance of Saraswathipuram Police.

Dr. Sudha Rudrappa, wife of Dr. Venkatesh and daughter of Dr. Y.P. Rudrappa, had filed a complaint with the Women Police Station accusing him of harassing her for more dowry.

Dr. Sudha, a paediatrician at K.R. Hospital, has alleged in her complaint that she married Dr. Venkatesh about 13 years ago and Rs. 1 lakh was paid to him along with jewellery as dowry at the time of wedding.

Not satisfied with this, her husband continued to harass her to bring more dowry and it became unbearable in recent days, Dr. Sudha alleged.

Dr. Venkatesh is being produced before the Court today.


http://www.starofmysore.com/searchinfo.asp?search1=13112&search2=newsheadlines


========== end of news ========

Comment : Is 1 lakhs really that big ? that too for an EX VC'ss daughter who is a pediatrician ? dal mE kuch kala hai ?

=========================================================================================

Marriage vow only when guy is from IT

PTI[ SUNDAY, MAY 27, 2007 09:55:19 AM]

CHENNAI: Fat pay packets, junkets and lavish lifestyle have made Information Technology professionals the most sought after in the matrimony market, leaving others to sweat it out to win a bride.

"Until a decade ago, there was a great demand for grooms in banking sector as it was considered a secured and peaceful job. But today, the IT men are the hottest in the marriage market," says Murugavel Janakiraman, CEO of bharatmatrimony.com, a leading matrimony portal.

While men generally settle down for a good-looking, educated and caring bride, women look forward to a spouse who is well settled, capable of providing financial security.

With bulging pay packets and soaring career graph, the IT grooms are the ideal choice now, he adds.

According to a recent survey, about 70 per cent of youngsters prefer arranged marriages, leaving their parents to have a major say in matrimonial matters.

Surprisingly, grooms with government jobs are no more the favourites of elders and IT professionals have now become their blue-eyed boys.

Shanmugam, a marriage broker, says people are even prepared to spend beyond their capacity on a lavish marriage and extra dowry for a groom in the IT field.

Showing a bunch of biodata and horoscopes, he says about 70 per cent of them belong to IT professionals as the "demand" was very high. They are the popular choice even for girls in non-IT sectors, he adds.

At the age of 24, an IT professional can easily afford an apartment, car and a comfortable living, which may be an uphill task for his peer in any other field.

Shyam, a diploma holder working in a non-IT firm as systems engineer with almost nine years of experience, has been drawing a "decent salary" of Rs 16,000 per month.

But, he learnt the ground realities the hard way when he started searching for a bride two years ago.

"I was looking for an engineering graduate but I realised that my salary is not good enough to win a bride as the expectations are too high in the marriage market," he says.

Pointing out that even freshers in the IT field are drawing around Rs 20,000 per month, his friends are advising him to switch over to that sector.

Now in his late 20s, Shyam has joined part-time BE course to get a bride at least if not an IT job.

The case of Ramachandran is no different. Working as a sub-editor in a media organisation, he is earning Rs 13,000 per month.

"I've posted my biodata on matrimony websites, but the response has not been encouraging. And the very first query that raises is about my monthly salary," he rues.

He feels educated well-salaried girls have now become out of reach for "commoners" like him.

Though the IT boom has ushered in economic empowerment of lakhs of youngsters, it has also created an imbalance among the youth as privileged and under-privileged, he remarks.


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Marriage_vow_only_when_guy_is_from_IT/RssArticleShow/articleshow/2077329.cms

 

Seven-yr-old faces dowry charges

Sameer Kumar, Abhay Mohan Jha
Saturday, May 26, 2007 (Begusarai)


A seven-year-old has been charged in a dowry case in Bihar. Santosh, a class four student has paid the price for a crime he did not commit.


''They framed me in a dowry case. I study in class 4. Police came to my house and asked for money. They threatened to send me to Munger otherwise,'' he said.

Santosh was named in a dowry harassment case last year along with his parents and his elder brother. His parents and brother got bail after his father reached a compromise with the complainant. But given Santosh's tender age, the court didn't pass any specific bail order in his name.

Santosh's lawyer says there were serious lapses in the way the case was handled.

''The age of none of the accused has been mentioned in the entire case diary,'' said Vijay Maharaj. Police admit they made a mistake but say the witnesses in the case had a role to play.

''None of the witnesses mentioned that the accused is under age. I agree that we have made a mistake in this case,'' said Amit Lodha, SP, Begusarai.

Police say Santosh can breathe easy irrespective of the outcome of the case. But this comes as cold comfort for someone who has learnt a bitter lesson so early in life.

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20070013361

Letter to a NRI Hubby

I often answer questions from harassed husbands. I am blogging some of these, sans identifying details


Dear NRI Hubby

These days I come across 100s if not 1000s of FALSE extortion cases and FALSE dowry cases. Courts have condemned this. The law that was made to protect the woman, seems to be grossly mis-used to extract money from innocent men or to wreck vengeance. I'm saddened to hear your story.

Do not think you are the only one affected. There are 10s of 1000s of FALSE cases all over India.

.....Subject to my idea of *self help* which is very essential : http://tinyurl.com/pxcfz and standard disclaimers as in http://tinyurl.com/947u9

... may I suggest
---------------------------

>
>We have lot of disputes since our marriage.
>
>despite of our regular request she is living
>with her parents with my child and used to
>blackmail me socially/economically/mentally and
>now legally also.

Ignorance of Law and lack of social awareness is the biggest problem facing Indian men

We all suffer today because a few years ago, we ourselves as youngsters DID NOT FIGHT AGAINST, did not do road rokos and morchas against the rampant rise of radical feminism in India

Over the last 20 + years feminists have been fighting, fighting against Men, fighting against women who support men, fighting with FALSE statistics of dowry deaths and cheating husbands running away overseas and so on

Now they have armed themselves with laws that are TOTALLY ONE SIDED and still majority of the men continue to pity women .....

...... and the sad part is that well educated men are also in the same boat, worried about their DAILY LIFE rather than the larger canvass, the society ... the family ... the well being of MEN tomorrow

Even in the internet Era, we (a group of husbands hit by dowry law), have repeatedly written about misuse. No one cares till it is rather serious

ref Blog post titled : Wake up !! or else your son may be the NEXT target !!!
http://bareact.blogspot.com/2007/01/wake-up-or-else-your-son-may-be-next.html
or http://tinyurl.com/37n5tv

I hardly get comments of support even while writing these !!

Having said all the above, let me continue with some specific comments to your mail. please read below


Prove that she deserted you and you did NOT throw her out

>Since last two year we are
>not living together and even dont have any
>telephonic conversation as i was totally
>frustrated with the behaviour of my Wife and
>inlaws.
>

Do you have any proof that she left willfully ? for e.g. did you send her letters by registered post or courier with ack. due, requesting her to come back ?? I am NOT sure if you understand this but let me tell you, MOST unscrupulous WOMAN turn up at police stations and claim that their hubbies have DESERTED THEM and run away abroad.

do NOT worry if you do NOT have such proof, but I am taking the time to explain the situation to you

These false complaints of desertion are compounded by myriad FALSE news paper reports which claim that NRI hubbies have deserted Indian women... again .... MEN DO NOT FIGHT such false reports

Just search THIS MONTHS news alone and you will get multiple URL and some from Punjab as well of such cases . I am posting just three of them below for sake of brevity


Cells to redress plight of women deserted by NRI husbands
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Cells_to_redress_plight_of_women_deserted_by_NRI_husbands/articleshow/2057446.cms
or
http://tinyurl.com/2h8ygm



Non Reliable Indian grooms under vigil
http://www.saharasamay.com/samayhtml/articles.aspx?newsid=74505
or
http://tinyurl.com/23wca7



Cells for Non Reliable Indian husbands soon
http://www.saharasamay.com/samayhtml/Articles.aspx?NewsId=75597
or
http://tinyurl.com/272gcr


Give up Fear

>At present i am in (abroad) since last three
>months and pursuing ____ __________
>__________ fully funded by _____________
>When she came to know about this she just
>lodged a FIR in women Cell, _____ against
>all my family members including me also. Now
>guide me what i should do. She just want to
>spoil my career.
>

First. Give up fear

Indians have fought against British cannons and mughal invaders

I'm totally surprised that you should start shivering ...that too for a false case

Counter her complaint

Here are some simple steps on what to do

1. Get a lawyer in your hometown

2. Get that lawyer to approach the CAW cell and get a copy of the complaint. Do NOT tell him that you cannot come back..., that your entire life is in danger ...blah blah blah ....

3. some one has lodged a false case, get a copy of that complaint AND APPLY FOR BAIL FOR ALL THOSE IN INDIA

4. Thanks to the activities of the Save Indian family foundation and 498a org etc even judges are fully aware of the misuse of DOWRY LAW and FALSE complaints by women

5. So DO NOT PANIC...DO NOT. FULL STOP ....

6. APPLY FOR A BAIL. FREEDOM IS YOUR BIRTH RIGHT AS YOU ARE INNOCENT.
Read case laws where courts have granted bail. One of them is posted here
http://vinayak.jconserv.net/viewtopic.php?t=24


7. Read about the law, read more and more about the ground realities and update yourself of the ground realities



>My (Education / Job) if for ___years and
>i wants to finish it at any cost /stay abroad
>in any condition as i really worked very hard
>to earn this _______________.
>

Every man has two responsibilities. One personal and other social. I do NOT have to tell you, the importance of his social responsibility.

I am really impressed by your personal achievements. I am sure you are ready to serve the society as well.

Since this is our first mail / interaction and we do NOT know each other much I am eagerly awaiting your reply on how you wish to serve the society

>Is there any chances of cancellation of my
>_______________ and go back to India,
>

NIL....IF YOU FIGHT BACK

So, bottom-line is, ".. Never run away .."

Never give them a chance to prove that you are a deserter

>In any case i does not want to continue the
>relationship with her due to some reasons which
>are unexplainable.
>
>I need a divorce.
>

DO NOT .....DO NOT file for divorce

Read here for why ?
http://bareact.blogspot.com/2006/12/divorce-why-now.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/y6a4cj


>I have not taken any thing from her stri dhan
>every thing is in her custody including our
>family Jewellary but i am not worried about
>that.
>My main concern is towards my Family members
>what should be next course of action from our
>side as the woman cell has issued a notice to
>appear on ___ / _____. My father is a govt.
>employee, me also and ___ youngerbrothers
>pursuing their studies. It is also a matter of
>their future. So kindly guide me.
>

GET A BAIL FOR YOUR PARENTS

THEY SHOULD NOT GET HIT IN THE CROSS FIRE

READ MORE BELOW

Bail / anticipatory bail
----------------------------------------------------

When a complaint has been made and registered in police, CAW cell etc. try to get the copy and apply for Anticipatory bail, [file for court notice for protection or stay of arrest] whatever applicable as per your state

At any cost you or your family member(s) should not surrender to police

Once you are able to get the bail , THE OPPOSITE PARTY will be under pressure.

The opponent's very tactic is to arrest you. As you are innocent and in most cases you may not have even stepped into a police station you will be shocked.

They will try to use this shock to ill treat you, wreck vengeance or extract money from you

STAY COOL !! STAY FOCUSED. Get an anticipatory bail - IF the case is already filed. Once you are free and out you can fight your honest case

Always ask the bail for family members first (except husband) .

Once the same achieved , then apply for the bail for husband in lower court , lower court will may reject it , move to session court ( may reject it ) , move to high court ( may reject it ) , then move to supreme court , we are here to help you out.

Normally at the High court level itself you should be in a position to get a bail. The HC know that the Supreme Court Judges are not fools.

Even In case of TADA/POTA people get bail, this is just a family dispute - so DO NOT panic

While these procedures might seem costly it is nothing compared to paying ransom to an un scrupulous female who tries to arrest you



>Right now i dont have any telephone no., but
>kindly give me your contact no. so that my
>family members can contact you in India / USA
>

I have given ALL INDIAN and US help line nos at the end of my mail


>How long it will take to get rid of that
>greedy lady.
>
>Should i file a divorce case.
>

In this game, haste is waste

DO NOT .....DO NOT file for divorce

Read here for why ?
http://bareact.blogspot.com/2006/12/divorce-why-now.html
or
http://tinyurl.com/y6a4cj



>But my first priority is of well being of my
>family and tension free continuous study.
>
>Can _________ stop my funding on just her
>complained.
>

AS I SAID EARLIER, NIL IF YOU FIGHT BACK

This is a fight of good vs evil. Every fight counts

Countless men have won this battle

Many more have run away and are living in shame

You choose ....



>These are very much question due to which i
>cannot sleep. my whole career is on the stake.
>
>Please guide me.
>
>Thanking you
>
>Yours Truly
>NRI Hubby
>
>
>

I am also copying this mail to some of our dedicated volunteers


HELP LINE NOS
----------------------


All India Helpline Number: 91-92434 73794 (24 Hours)
alternate Nos : 91-9810611534 or 91-80-65334135

Volunteer Helpline Numbers (limited contact hours)
Also at : http://tinyurl.com/2dewon
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Delhi: 9911119113, 9810611534, 9891369616 (Rajeev)

Kanpur (and U.P.): 09335014984 (Aanand), 09935239764 (Lt.Col.(Retd.) C.S.Khandelwal)

Calcutta:
Mr. Vineet Ruia - 033-25347398 , 033-25217318 - 8:30 to 10 PM ONLY
Mr. Kamlesh K Dwivedi - 9231835462
Mr. D.S.Rao - 9830151555
Mr. Suman Chatterjee - 9830927619

Bangalore:
*Asha Kiran*, 1252/6, P.M. Lakshmia Layout,
Magdi Cord Road Layout , 1 st Main, Vijay Nagar.
Bangalore 560 040.
Helpline: 91-80-65334135
Mobile : 9845986250

Mumbai: 9869323538 (Guptaji) / (helpline) 9224335577
Ahmedabad: 9898989884
Gujrat: 09825365816

Hyderabad :
Prasad : (9848280354) kollud@yahoo.com (Miyapur, Hyderabad)
Prakash: (9948504037) victim498a@gmail.com (BHEL, Hyderabad)
Pavan Kumar: (9985858729) yangaldaspk@yahoo.com (Hyderabad)
Dr. Sreedhar: (9908578457) ameresree@yahoo.com (Secunderabad)

Jaipur: 09352562456
Nasik: 9371988132

United States (USA): 650-430-9544, 612-812-4340 (Avro, call between 10PM to midnight Eastern )


Please note this help / service is based on a self help concept. We share our experiences here. We do NOT just advise you TO take one path or another. DECISIONS are yours, but we suggest some ideas based on our experience.

If you wish to get maximum benefit from writing to us, It is also IMPORTANT THAT YOU READ AND UNDERSTAND the law with us.

You may also join the following groups, read the archives, post your queries and seek clarifications. [Please note that the yahoo groups are OPEN forum and so take care of confidentiality]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saveindiansociety/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saveindianfamily/



More after hearing from you


regards, vinayak

My post above is Subject to
----------------------------
1. My idea of *self help* which is very essential : http://tinyurl.com/pxcfz
2. Standard disclaimers as in http://tinyurl.com/947u9
3. A short preamble : http://tinyurl.com/hatew

Dowry Law Misuse : http://tinyurl.com/tdkx6 , http://tinyurl.com/v5vp8

Groups :

http://groups.google.com/group/MatriSuggest
http://groups.google.com/group/SIFsuggest


Blogs :

http://bareact.blogspot.com/2006/12/divorce-why-now.html
http://tinyurl.com/2tb3s7
http://tinyurl.com/2dkub4
http://tinyurl.com/23xppp

http://vinayak.jconserv.net/index.php

http://www.bloglines.com/blog/eVinayak
http://bareact.blogspot.com/
http://my2cw.blogspot.com/
http://o3.indiatimes.com/mera/
http://www.blurty.com/users/vinayak/

Seek advise : All India contact Nos : http://tinyurl.com/vntjz

>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: "address_changed@yahoo.co.in"
>
>To: e_vinayak@yahoo.com
>Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 1:58:46 AM
>Subject: Advice Please - NRI Hubby -
>
>Name: NRI Hubby
>Email: address_changed@yahoo.co.in
>Hear about us: GoogleSearch
>498A Registered: NO
>498A Place:
>498A Date:
>Any Other IPCs:
>Relatives Accused:
>Jailed Days: NO
>Stage of Case: inWomenCell
>Spent Money on 498A:
>Lived in joint Family: NO
>Marriage Date: _______ 2003
>Wife Age:
>Wife's Education Level: ____
>Wife works (earns)?: works
>Filed for Divorce: NO
>Have children: YES
>Living With Wife: NO
>Negotiating with Wife: NO
>Took her Stridhan Back: YES
>She had Any Medical Problems: NO
>Willing to Help other Victims: YES
>Ready for TV/Press Interivew : YES
>Contact No:
>Comments:
>
>We have lot of disputes since our marriage.
>
>despite of our regular request she is living
>with her parents with my child and used to
>blackmail me socially/economically/mentally and
>now legally also. Since last two year we are
>not living together and even dont have any
>telephonic conversation as i was totally
>frustrated with the behaviour of my Wife and
>inlaws.
>
>At present i am in (abroad) since last three
>months and pursuing ____ __________
>__________ fully funded by _____________
>When she came to know about this she just
>lodged a FIR in women Cell, _____ against
>all my family members including me also. Now
>guide me what i should do. She just want to
>spoil my career.
>
>
>My Ph.D is of ___ years and i wants to finish it
>in any condition as i really worked very hard
>to earn this _______________.
>
>Is there any chances of cancellation of my
>_______________ and go back to India,
>
>In any case i does not want to continue the
>relationship with her due to some reasons which
>are unexplainable.
>
>I need a divorce.
>
>I have not taken any thing from her stri dhan
>every thing is in her custody including our
>family Jewellary but i am not worried about
>that.
>
>My main concern is towards my Family members
>what should be next course of action from our
>side as the woman cell has issued a notice to
>appear on ___ / _____. My father is a govt.
>employee, me also and ___ youngerbrothers
>pursuing their studies. It is also a matter of
>their future. So kindly guide me.
>
>Right now i dont have any telephone no., but
>kindly give me your contact no. so that my
>family members can contact you in India / USA
>
>
>How long it will take to get rid of that
>greedy lady.
>
>Should i file a divorce case.
>
>But my first priority is of well being of my
>family and tension free continuos study.
>
>Can _____ stop my funding on just her
>complained.
>
>These are very much quetion due to which i
>cannot sleep. my whole career is on the stake.
>
>Please guide me.
>
>Thanking you
>
>Yours Truly
>NRI Hubby
>
>
>

Open the Pandora's box !!

‘Domestic violence could be both physical & emotional’

Blogger's comments : Who defines what is emotional violence ? Who sets the boundaries ? each and every judge will start interpreting "emotional abuse" in his / her own way and we will have utter confusion. Is a joke an emotional abuse, Is a jibe an emotional abuse ? Is a genuine decision to move away from a NON WORKING relationship emotional abuse ? who draws the line and where ?

========= news item ===========

New Delhi: Amitava Mukherjee, the first person to be indicted under the new Domestic Violence Act, said he has been happily married for the last 25 years, while casting aspersions on the character of the complainant.

He said that he had kept his wife and family posted about the constant harassment he faced at the hands of the woman who followed him everywhere.

After hearing both sides and scrutinising the evidence, the magistrate confirmed that the woman and Mukherjee had a live-in relationship that came under the purview of the Domestic Violence Act.

He said: ``From the perusal of documents placed on record, the petitioner and the respondent have lived in a rented room in tourist hostelcum-programme centre, Jai Singh Road, New Delhi, as well as in Bangkok. It is my considered view that petitioner as well as respondent lived together in a shared household.''

Terming that domestic violence could be physical as well as emotional, the magistrate said: ``The petitioner has stated in her petition that the respondent has admitted her as his wife and applied `sindoor' in her `maang'. This is emotional abuse by the respondent towards the petitioner.'' ``From the material placed on record, it is my considered view that petitioner is subjected to domestic violence as defined under Section 3 of the Act,'' the magistrate said in his 11-page order.

On the compensation, he said: ``Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and social status of both the parties, I deem it appropriate to grant Rs 75,000 for food, clothes, medicines and other basic necessities and further household expenses as Rs 50,000 and other miscellaneous as Rs 25,000.''

Mukherjee has the option of complying with the magistrate's order or going on appeal before a higher court.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Domestic_violence_could_be_both_physical__emotional/articleshow/2067927.cms

or

http://tinyurl.com/2zn9dy

======== end of news item ============

Liabilities for the man and relief for the woman !!!

Blogger's comments : Does the Domestic Violence act spell additional doom for men in India ?. This act provides relief ONLY to the women. No reliefs are provided for men. What about men who get cheated ? what about women who blackmail men ? Who will bell those cats ?


==============News item ================

Man fined for abuse of live-in partner.
First-Ever Ruling Under New Domestic Violence Act
News item by Dhananjay Mahapatra & Abhinav Garg | TNN

New Delhi: The first-ever ruling came recently under the new Domestic Violence Act asking the man to pay a Rs 1.5 lakh compensation to his livein partner for walking out on her after holding out hopes of marriage.

This ruling, delivered by city magistrate Jagdish Kumar last week, is on grounds of emotional violence, not physical abuse. It also marks the legal recognition of a certain responsibility in relationships too as it deals with a live-in arrangement between two adults.

The new Act provides for civil liabilities for the man and relief to the woman abused — physically or emotionally — during the time they lived together. While this is aimed at guarding the woman against gender vulnerability, some legal experts also believe that it may tilt the balance unfairly against the man as it could open him up to prosecution if he walks out of a soured livein relationship.

The case relating to magistrate Jagdish Kumar's ruling is this.

The lady stated in her complaint that she came in contact with Amitava Mukherjee in 1999 when he was working as the country director of Action Aid India. In January-February 2003, Mukherjee offered her an assignment with UNESCAP while making her believe that he was no longer living with his wife and had already sought to annul his marriage. Towards the end of April 2003, she was asked to move to Bangkok and work for UNESCAP.

Around May 2003, Mukherjee invited her to stay with him. Believing that he has separated from his wife, she started living with him, the woman said in her complaint filed through counsel Aparna Bhat. She also talked about her pregnancy and the ``deceitful manner'' in which he made her drink some medicine for abortion, which led to first signs of strain in their relationship.

Mukherjee, on one pretext or the other, avoided marrying her and after three years into the live-in relationship walked out of it. The complainant alleged that on October 26 last year, when she was visiting Delhi, she got a call from him, saying that he has vacated the Bangkok house and shifted their belongings to another house but did not divulge its address.

Mukherjee, defending himself, denied every allegation and termed the complaint as a tactic to blackmail him and extort money.

BREACH OF TRUST

The complainant says Amitava Mukherjee, claiming to be separated from his wife, invited her to stay with him

He avoids marrying her and after three years, walks out of the live-in relationship

Magistrate says Mukherjee's volte-face after putting `sindoor' in her `maang' means emotional abuse

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Man_fined_for_abuse_of_live-in_partner/articleshow/2067990.cms

or

http://tinyurl.com/2a45ev

======================================

Judge's grandson removed from Judge's home by another court !!

by: "Binoe Manuel"
Mon May 21, 2007

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> News report >>>>>>>>>
Additional District and Sessions Judge, Veena Birbal ordered Rahat Quddusi (35) [son of a Sitting Judge] to hand over the custody of his son Moit to his wife Samina (30) [Judge's daughter in law].

.........On May 4 this year, Samina had come to Delhi with her son Moit, husband Rahat Quddusi, mother-in-law Jaya Quddusi to attend a marriage ceremony and stayed in UP Bhawan at Sardar Patel Marg, Chanakyapuri.

At 2 am on the same day, Rahat assaulted her and threatened to kill her, he also thrown her out of the UP Bhawan and the three month-old-baby was forcibly taken away by Rahat and Jaya, Samina alleged in her petition.............

......... rest of the story after comments below :
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< comments / notes by Binoe :

I find this report interesting and intruging. If you note the problem is deeper - I mean there could be 2 possibilities to ponder on:

1. [.........]

2. The Judge and his folks too like many of us, though being good have been implicated by women oriented and biased laws and are helpless.

Points to be noted are
- wife was not kicked out at Orrisa but rather at Delhi where her folks too reside,
- all this time at Orrisa which is their home ground the Hubby and his parents never thought of kicking her out
- how come they did so at Delhi which is her home ground and they were guests in Delhi only for a few days &
- this incident took place only on the 4th of this month as per the report, how come it went upto the supreme court at lightening speed

Don't you think there are some strings messed up somewhere?

Wish someone could get in touch with this Judge.

Point to ponder on - Just because that Judge is a Public Servant was his case given the priority? As a Servant to the Public who we are and an office which is to be serving public, ours should be given more priority.

Wish we too could move upto the Supreme court in like less than 16days!!

If someone knows how to, could you advice me on how this was possible??

Cheers....Binoe

============================ news item =============================

http://www.dailypioneer.com/indexn12.asp?main_variable=CITY&file_name=city11%2Etxt&counter_img=11

Three-month-old reunited with mother

Staff Reporter | New Delhi

....the child was forcibly taken away by father

Complying with the order of the Supreme Court, a Tis Hazari Court on Saturday united a mother and her three-month-old-baby, who was forcibly taken away by her husband, the son of a sitting High Court Judge in Orissa.

Additional District and Sessions Judge, Veena Birbal ordered Rahat Quddusi (35) to hand over the custody of his son Moit to his wife Samina (30).

"I am now very happy that my son Moit has come to me after the Supreme Court gave an order in my favour on Friday," said an emotional Samina after taking custody of her son.

On May 4 this year, Samina had come to Delhi with her son Moit, husband Rahat Quddusi, mother-in-law Jaya Quddusi to attend a marriage ceremony and stayed in UP Bhawan at Sardar Patel Marg, Chanakyapuri.

At 2 am on the same day, Rahat assaulted her and threatened to kill her, he also thrown her out of the UP Bhawan and the three month-old-baby was forcibly taken away by Rahat and Jaya, Samina alleged in her petition.

Samina also alleged her the harassment of her in-laws started ever since her marriage with Rahat on March 21, 2004, according to Muslim rites at Lucknow. Jaya started raising dowry demands and caused mental torture and harassment, she alleged. Moit was born on January 7 this year.

The parents of Samina, who were present in the court also maintained that their daughter would now live with them in Noida.

=====================================================================

Code may make bail easier to get

Code may make bail easier to get

New Delhi, May 21: The Union home ministry wants to liberalise the process of granting bail, given that prisons in the country are “over-crowded”. “Bail, being a legal right, has to be liberally granted,” notes the ministry in the Draft National Policy on Criminal Justice, suggesting that arrests should be “restricted” and the bail procedure “liberalised”. The policy also suggests keeping undertrial prisoners in separate institutions. “By liberal use of bail and probation and avoiding short-term imprisonment, the prison population can be kept under reasonable limits,” the ministry suggests in the draft policy. “Unlike prisons in many other countries, Indian jails have majority of inmates who are undertrial prisoners who could not secure their freedom due to denial of bail or non-fulfilment of conditions of bail,” it says. Another large section living in prisons are people sentenced to short terms of imprisonment in whose cases correction or rehabilitation is not relevant. The ministry points out that the system of classification and segregation of prisoners is “more on paper than in practice” in many institutions. The law of anticipatory bail also needs restatement in the light of Supreme Court interpretations to ensure that it does not defeat the cause of justice and does not discriminate in the favour of rich only, says the draft policy. Suggesting that arrests be restricted to “warrants” only, the ministry says that a large number of arrests being made today are perceived as “unnecessary”, quoting the National Police Commission, and thus need to be avoided. Probation, parole and the concept of “open jails”, if used intelligently and imaginatively, can also help ease the ills of the prison system, notes the ministry in the draft policy. However, in cases where the responsibility for a criminal activity has been established, the ministry wants that accountability should be fixed on individuals and “publicly notified” periodically. When arrests take place, the procedure should be strictly followed, says the ministry, and any violations made therein are to be taken very seriously by superior officers themselves.

Lok Adalat etcetra...

On mediations and Lok adalats..

A little above Lok Adalats

1. Lok Adalat (people’s courts), established by the government settles dispute through conciliation and compromise. For e.g, In the state of Tamil Nadu, The First Lok Adalat was held in Chennai in 1986.

1.1. Lok Adalat accepts the cases which could be settled by conciliation and compromise, and pending in the regular courts within their jurisdiction.

2. The evolution of this movement was a part of the strategy to relieve heavy burden on the Courts with pending cases. The reason to create such camps were only the pending cases and to give relief to the litigants who were in a queue to get justice.

3. The Lok Adalat is presided over by a sitting or retired judicial officer as the chairman, with two other members, usually a lawyer and a social worker.

4. There is no court fee.

5. Main condition of the Lok Adalat is that both parties in dispute should agree for settlement.

Agreement

6. IF THERE IS NO AGREEMENT, lok adalat will refer the case back to thee court

7. The basic principle of law is that If there is CONSENT / AGREEMENT BY you, later, you cannot go back and appeal the decree

8. Consent decrees cannot be appealed UNLESS total fraud or serious malafide can be shown

9. You can arrive at a consent with the opposite party either in court, or at lok adalat or at a mediation cell or .......

10. So a CONSENT decree is the crucial issue (Not because Lok Adalat is some supreme court !!)


Experience sharing

11. In my case I was sent to the MEDIATION CELL - please note this is NOT the LOK ADALAT but another way of approaching a compromise

12. I told the mediators the following
12.1. I was and am willing to take the wife and kid back
12.2. My wife deserted me and filed false 498A
12.3. My wife threw my mum out and still openly claims the same
12.4. I am willing to provide alternate means for my mum and I am ready to live in a operate house with my wife and kid ALONE
12.5. If my wife wishes so she may work. If she choose so she may stay at home and I shall in both case proved for the wife and kid ... and all reasonable expenses of education etc etc....
12.6. If my wife's job so requires that she work only in India, I am ready to come back and live in India - city of HER choice
12.7. I have NO other siblings who will stay with me or interfere with me

13. In reply my wife screamed
13.1.Yes she screamed, called me names, called my mother names and said I have to pay her lakhs and lakhs
13.2. The mediators knew very well that she was wrong in her claims

14. Still the mediators said AS LONG AS A COMPROMISE is reached I will have to attend dates ......after dates...... after dates ....... travelling from Abroad to India at my cost, while my wife will take a local auto rickshaw ...come to the mediation cell...scream and go back !!!

15. After a few dates - and lakhs of rupees expenses for me, spent on Air travel, hotel stay, lost working days, lost sleep and what not ......and the great pleasure of hearing my wife scream in a semi open room, I may be referred back to the court for proceedings

Now tell me how does this help a harassed husband ??


Lok Adalat and 498A

IMHO, lok adalat cannot be used in 498a cases. Because "..A Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to settle, by way of effecting compromise between the parties, any matter which may be pending before any court, as well as matters at pre-litigative stage i.e. disputes which have not yet been formally instituted in any Court of Law. Such matters may be civil or criminal in nature, but any matter relating to an offence not compoundable under any law cannot be decided by the Lok Adalat even if the parties involved therein agree to settle the same....



regards
Vinayak







>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

>
>lok adalat
>Posted by: "Babu Baba"
>Mon May 21, 2007 9:46 pm (PST)
>
>if there is a compromise then it is better to
>settle all the cases (except 498A) in lok adalat
>since there lies no appeal to the decree of lok
>adalat. correct me if i am wrong!
>
>

....about RCR

Posted by: "Binoe Manuel"


The plus points I see by filing RCR pretty much on Vernal's lines are:

1. If 498A has to happen it will happen, probably they are waiting for the right time when they can lash at you at the most unexpected time when you are in between something important. By filing RCR you would be instigating your opposition to file if they really want to file - its like cutting off the last few strands of the axe that's to fall on your neck rather than waiting in fear. Once and if it falls you know the direction its headed for and then you could cure yourself and launch your war.

2. Filing RCR legally proves the date from when you have been living separately.

3. By filing RCR You are putting on the Good person picture of calling your wife back and not deserting her or throwing her out of your house.

4. Give you a leverage for AB/Bail incase of 498A. Basically adorning an armour (kavach).

5. Legally proving to the court that she and only she was the cause of the marriage breaking by deserting you and not you!!

Now the most important points to ponder on which should be everyone who files RCR that should be a safe kept secret final objective.

6. So if point 5 is proved then you again get a leverage in maintenance & alimony, since you are ready to take care of her needs and necessities but she doesn't want to join you but stay away and suck money off.

7. Also if pt 5 is proved it proves the wife has not looked into the benefit of the child by deserting and breaking the family for her whims and fancies - if the court looks at the benefit of the child should he/she be in the custody of the person who did not look at his/her benefit in breaking the marriage??

Now note during the initial petition for RCR do not mention any conditions in it come what may - you bring up these conditions only on the final stages when you think its going to backfire and she is going to join you against your wishes and for her ulterior motives.

By not mentioning the conditions initially you are just showing the court that you are unconditionally ready to take her back again trying to paint a good picture.

Best Regards...

Binoe

Girl refuses boy as he is black but tries a DOWRY story !!!

“Hum kaale hain, isiliye shaadi karne se mana kar rahi hai

(as I am dark, the girl is refusing to marry me”)


......... .... in the otherwise dark district of Gopalganj in Bihar, it was a bride’s turn to object to the groom’s complexion. ......

Pradip Kumar (21) is quoted as saying that when he arrived with 50 relatives and friends to wed Suman (18), the bride’s family refused to solemnise the marriage because of his dark complexion.........

........The groom obliged and said: “Hum kaale hain, isiliye shaadi karne se mana kar rahi hai (as I am dark, the girl is refusing to marry me”)......

Indeed, the bride’s family has a different take, not given any credence by the media in search of sensation. The bride, they claim, refused to marry the boy because his father demanded at the last moment, as many fathers are still wont to do, to demand a higher dowry than was agreed upon.




http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070520/asp/frontpage/story_7801963.asp


Frivolous spin to dowry resistance

- Bride ‘relents’ after refusing to marry a groom, too ‘dark’ for comfort

SANTOSH SINGH

Pradip Kumar and Suman Kumari. Telegraph pictures

Patna, May 19: Grooms in this country have been turning down otherwise eligible brides, who are deemed “too dark”.

But in the otherwise dark district of Gopalganj in Bihar, it was a bride’s turn to object to the groom’s complexion. At least that is what local television channels, news agencies and newspapers would have people believe.

Pradip Kumar (21) is quoted as saying that when he arrived with 50 relatives and friends to wed Suman (18), the bride’s family refused to solemnise the marriage because of his dark complexion.

It is not known if he sang the old hit, Hum kaale hain to kya huwa, dilwale hain (What if I am dark, my heart is deep or at the right place). But reports speak of him offering a form of Gandhian satyagraha and a dharna for 48 hours before the bride relented.

Kumar, a mason, had set out to wed Suman, daughter of a daily-wage earner who lived a few kilometres away under the same police station of Bhore. The bride herself has a complexion best described as “wheatish”. But her friends apparently whispered their disapproval of the “dark” groom, prompting her to leave the mandap, the place where the wedding was to be solemnised.

The groom, in turn, refused to budge without the bride. The marriage could not be solemnised on May 12 and the groom’s entourage also refused to move. They spent the night under a canopy put up in front of the bride’s house. The growing power of television was evident when a local channel arrived to record his sound byte. The groom obliged and said: “Hum kaale hain, isiliye shaadi karne se mana kar rahi hai (as I am dark, the girl is refusing to marry me”).

The story had obvious contradictions. The two families lived so close to each other that it appears improbable that the bride could have been in the dark about any “dark secret” of the groom.

Indeed, the bride’s family has a different take, not given any credence by the media in search of sensation. The bride, they claim, refused to marry the boy because his father demanded at the last moment, as many fathers are still wont to do, to demand a higher dowry than was agreed upon.

In any case, they added, the bride’s father and other family members had seen the groom and described him to the girl. But once the bride put her foot down, the groom’s family decided to give up their demand.

But then dowry demands having lost their novelty, the enterprising media latched on to the bride’s alleged thumbs down to the colour code.

An Pious Elderly Woman kills herself due to False dowry case threats

........When my son finally went to canada, she [Daughter in law] went to her parent's house and threatened to register a case of dowry against us. My son tried his best to cool down things. But he was threatened with such dire consequences that he returned home".

......... son went straight to his in-laws house in Chandigarh where he was forced to part with the passport.........


Harassed by bahu, saas kills herself
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2007/20070519/ldh1.htm#5

Jupinderjit Singh
Tribune News Service

Ludhiana, May 18

Women committing suicide due to troublesome mothers-in-law is often heard, but an aged woman of Urban Estate, Dugri, today jumped to death before a running train allegedly due to harassment from daughter-in-law. The woman claimed in a suicide note that she could not bear the harassment at the hands of her daughter-in-law and her relatives any longer and hence was ending her life.

On the basis of the two-page suicide note, filled with heart rending tale of woes of victim Dilip Gandhi, the Government Railway Police booked her daughter-in-law Sonia Gandhi, Sonia's mother Harinder Sethi and sister Chhina Walia for abetting Dilip to commit suicide under sections 306, 34 of the IPC.

All accused live in Chandigarh. Sonia is the daughter of a retired Superintendent of Police M.S. Sethi.

Interestingly, the main reason behind the dispute between the family members was the immigration of Sonia's husband Gursharan Singh Gandhi to Canada. Sonia and other accused were allegedly vehemently against Gursharan's move.

The victim says in the suicide note that Sonia and other accused allegedly opposed Gursharan's immigration to such an extent that he was forced to return to India after spending a few weeks in Canada. He had managed to go abroad after a six-year wait. Once back home, the in-laws forcibly took his passport and other documents away.

Additional SHO, GRP, Harbans Singh said the woman jumped before the Ludhiana-Jakhal train around 5:30 am today. The police later recovered the suicide note, which revealed her identity. He said no arrest had been made so far.

The suicide note revealed that the victim was quite religious. She began the note offering prayers to Sikh gurus and tendering an apology for ending her life, given to her by the almighty.

She wrote: "She had no other option as the harassment by the daughter-in-law and other accused was driving them mad". She said her son was married to Sonia 10 years ago. They had a daughter from the marriage. Her son managed immigration after much effort but Sonia always opposed his decision.

When my son finally went to canada, she went to her parent's house and threatened to register a case of dowry against us. My son tried his best to cool down things. But he was threatened with such dire consequences that he returned home".

She further claimed that her son went straight to his in-laws house in Chandigarh where he was forced to part with the passport.

Later, he took a Rs 9,000 per month job with the Guru Gobind Singh Study Circle.

This money was insufficient for the family and there was no compromise by the accused.

The accused then humiliated her in public by levelling cheap allegations, which she could not bear and decided to end her life.

Filing false 498A case amounts to cruelty - Bombay HC

From : The Judis . Nic database at :
http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/data/judgements/2005/CFCA431301.pdf


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.12 OF 2002

Monindarpalsinha N. Kochar, )
age 50 years, Occupation - Service, )
R/o.4/15, Anand Housing Society, )
Shankar Seth Road, Pune 37. ).. Appellant

Versus

Jyotindar Kaur Mohindarpal N.Kochar, )
age 42, Occ: Business, )
R/o.Kalyan Sing Sahani, )
RB 11/1 Salunkhe Vihar, )
Kondhwa, Pune 38. ).. Respondent

--

Ms Neeta Karnik for the appellant.
Shri D.P.Guchiya for the respondent.

--

CORAM : R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR &
ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ.
DATED : 20TH JUNE, 2005.

JUDGMENT : ( PER R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J )

1. Heard. This appeal arises from the judgment dated 26th November, 2000 passed by the Family Court, Pune, in Divorce Petition No.926 of 1995 filed by the appellant-husband against the respondent-wife. By the impugned judgment, the petition for divorce was dismissed while granting permanent alimony to the respondent at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month. The divorce was sought on the ground of desertion and cruelty comprised under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

2. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent took place on 29th August, 1993. The respondent went to her parent’s house on 24th December, 1993. On 22nd September, 1994, the respondent-wife filed petition for judicial separation being Petition No.656 of 1994. The respondent lodged complaint against the appellant and his parents under Section 498A of I.P.C., wherein, the appellant and his parents were arrested and prosecuted under the said provision of law in the Criminal Case No.356 of 1994. The fact regarding the complaint and arrest of the appellant and his parents was published in the newspapers - "Aaj Ka Anand" and "Sakal" on 27th September, 1994. The petition for judicial separation No.656 of 1994 came to be dismissed by the Family Court, Pune, by its Order dated 28th July, 1995. The appellant filed the petition for divorce being Petition No.926 of 1995 on 28th December, 1995 on the grounds stated above. After recording the evidence, the petition for divorce filed by the appellant came to be dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 26th November, 2000. The present appeal was filed on 2nd February, 2001. During the pendency of this appeal, on 23rd December, 2002, the learned Magistrate disposed of the Criminal Case No.356 of 1994 and acquitted the parents of the appellant and convicted the appellant under Section 498A of the I.P.C. The matter carried in appeal by the appellant being Criminal Appeal No.29 of 2003, which came to be filed on 20th January, 2003, and the same was disposed of on 7th May, 2004 thereby acquitting the appellant. Meanwhile, the respondent had also filed the petition for maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month and Rs.8 lakhs for purchasing a house, besides the petition for Stridhan being Petition No.7 of 2002, and they are stated to be pending before the Family Court, Pune.

3. It is the contention of the appellant that the respondent deserted the appellant and left the matrimonial house since 24th December, 1993 and proceeded to her parent’s house and she never returned to stay with the appellant. It is his further contention that the fact about desertion from 24th December, 1993 has been clearly admitted by the respondent in her testimony before the family Court in the proceedings for judicial separation filed by her and further the said fact has been confirmed in the judgment of the family Court while dismissing her petition for judicial separation. It is his further contention that the family Court while dismissing the said petition for judicial separation has also arrived at the finding that the respondent is living separately from her husband without any justification and she had left the matrimonial house without any reasonable cause. It is his further case that the intention on the part of the respondent to desert the matrimonial house and the company of the appellant from 24th December, 1993 was clear at the time when she left the matrimonial house on the same day. The same was confirmed from the fact of filing of the proceedings for judicial separation as well as criminal complaint under Section 498A of I.P.C., coupled with the fact that the respondent exhibited adamant and uncooperative attitude in refusing to come back to reside with the appellant inspite of various attempts on the part of the appellant for reconciliation and to bring her to the house of the appellant. It is the further case of the appellant that during the time she stayed with the appellant, she always misbehaved and harassed the appellant and his family members and was insisting for a residential house separate from that of the parents of the appellant. According to the appellant, his parents are ill and need constant medical care, apart from the fact that the appellant himself is a disabled person.

4. On the other hand, it is the case of the respondent that right from the day one she joined the appellant after the marriage, she was being illtreated and there was constant demand for Rs.1,00,000/- from the parents of the respondent to enable the appellant to purchase a car, and on account of refusal on the part of the respondent to pay the said amount to the appellant, the respondent was being harassed by one way or the other by the appellant and his parents. It is her further case that on 24th December, 1993 she was forced to leave the matrimonial house, and therefore, she had to proceed to live with her parents against her desire. It is the further case of the respondent that her attempt to stay with the appellant after the dismissal of the petition for judicial separation also proved futile on account of uncooperative attitude on the part of the appellant. It is her further case that considering the income of the appellant, the respondent is entitled for permanent alimony, and therefore, no fault can be found with the impugned judgment granting permanent alimony and dismissing the petition for divorce.

5. The family Court, Pune, after considering the evidence on record, has held that the appellant had failed to establish that the respondent had treated the appellant with cruelty within the meaning of the said expression under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 as also failed to prove that the respondent had deserted him for the period not less than two years immediately preceding presentation of the petition without just reason or proper cause, as contemplated under Section 13(1)(ib) of the said Act, and therefore, there was no case for grant decree of of divorce, however, simultaneously granted permanent alimony of Rs.1,000/- per month to the respondent.

6. While assailing the impugned judgment as far as it dismisses the petition for divorce is concerned, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the fact that the respondent left the matrimonial house on 24th December, 1993 having been established by a clear finding of the family Court to that effect in the proceedings for judicial separation filed by the respondent herself and further the fact that the respondent had filed the proceedings for judicial separation, complaint under Section 498A of I.P.C. against the appellant and his parents and got them arrested and prosecuted, got the news about their arrest published in the newspapers and the fact that she refused to come back to stay with the appellant inspite of various efforts on the part of the appellant in that regard, obviously establish desertion for a period of more than two years prior to the filing of the petition for divorce by the appellant and the Court below having totally failed to consider the same while rejecting the divorce petition had acted arbitrarily, rendering its judgment to be bad in law. The respondent has not shown any cause for leaving the matrimonial house on 24th December, 1993 as well as for not returning to reside with the appellant and the allegations regarding ill-treatment during the period she had stayed with the appellant as well as the alleged ground for leaving the matrimonial house from 24th December, 1993 have not been proved by the respondent. The intention on the part of the respondent not to return to reside with the appellant was clear on the day she left the matrimonial house and the same was confirmed from the fact of filing the petition for judicial separation, and further the fact that there was no reasonal cause for leaving matrimonial house on 24th December, 1993 and further confirmed with the clear finding in that regard by the family Court in its judgment while dismissing the proceedings for judicial separation and since there was no appeal against the said judgment, it had attained finality for all purposes. The appellant having clearly established with cogent evidence about the factum of desertion of the matrimonial house by the respondent from 24th December, 1993, he has a clear case for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. As regards the ground of cruelty, the learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that apart from the fact of filing of the false complaint, which has been abundantly established by the fact of dismissal of the complaint and acquittal of the appellant as well as his parents, there was humiliation to the appellant on account of arrest and detention in the police custody and publication of the news in that regard in the newspapers, and that was all on account of a false complaint by the respondent which clearly disclosed mental cruelty to the appellant warranting dissolution of the marriage, as contemplated under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It is further submitted that refusal to participate in the Chulah ceremony, which is a prestigious ceremony consequent to the marriage in the community of the appellant, a strange conduct on the part of the respondent, harassment caused by her to the appellant and his parents, abruptly leaving the matrimonial house without any justifiable cause and refusal to return to reside with the appellant, disclose cruelty on the part of the respondent to the appellant, and therefore, the Court below ought to have decreed the suit for divorce on the said ground also. The learned Advocate for the appellant further submitted that the evidence placed on record as regards the income of the appellant, financial obligations and the expenses incurred by the appellant on account of ill-health of his parents as well as for his own medical expenditure clearly reveal that there was no justification for grant of permanent alimony in favour of the respondent, and certainly not to the extent of Rs.1,000/- per month.

7. Reliance is sought to be placed in the decisions in the matter of Adhyatma Bhattar Alwar v. Adhyatma Bhattar Sri Devi, reported in (2002)1 SCC 308, of Sadhana Satish Kolvankar v. Satish Sachidanand Kolvankar, reported in 2005(2) Bom.C.R.340, G.V.N.Kameswara Rao v. G.Jabilli, reported in (2002)2 SCC 296, Smt.Kalpana Srivastava v. Surendra Nath Srivastava, reported in AIR 1985 Allahabad 253, and Rajkishore Prasad v. Smt. Raj Kumari Devi & Ors., reported in AIR 1986 Patna 362.

8. The learned Advocate appearing for the respondent, on the other hand, has submitted that there has been absolutely no evidence led by the appellant that the respondent had left the matrimonial house of her own and, on the contrary, the testimony of the respondent discloses that the respondent had not left the matrimonial house of her own but rather she was forced to leave the matrimonial house and was not taken inside the house after having driven her out of the house. That apart, even after the dismissal of the petition for judicial separation, she had made honest effort to go back to reside with the appellant but due to the adamant and uncooperative attitude on the part of the appellant, she was prohibited from residing in her matrimonial house. The learned Advocate for the respondent further submitted that there was absolutely no evidence on the point of desertion of the matrimonial house by the respondent and certainly not even after the dismissal of the petition for judicial separation, and therefore, no case was made out by the appellant for grant of divorce on the same ground. As regards the cruelty is concerned, the learned Advocate for the respondent submitted that there being absolutely no evidence led by the appellant, no fault can be found with the dismissal of the petition for divorce on the said ground. As regards the Chulah ceremony is concerned, apart from mere allegation in that regard, no evidence has been led so also in relation to the alleged conduct of harassment by the respondent. It is a mere word against word and there is no evidence led by the appellant though the burden was purely on him. He has further submitted that the impugned order was passed on 26th November, 2000 when the criminal case filed under Section 498A of the I.P.C. was not at all disposed of, and therefore, there was no occasion for the family Court to arrive at a conclusion that the complaint was false. Being so, for not giving any credence to the contention on the part of the appellant about the complaint being false, no fault can be found with the impugned judgment. The decision regarding acquittal of the appellant and his parents from the said complaint being not forming part of the evidence on record before the family Court, it would not be appropriate to interfere in the impugned judgment on the ground of such acquittal subsequent to the passing of the impugned judgment. Considering the monthly income of Rs.10,000/- of the appellant, according to the learned Advocate for the respondent, no fault can be found with the direction for permanent alimony of Rs.1,000/- per month issued by the family Court. Merely because some sundry expenses had to be incurred for the treatment of the parents of the appellant, that would not be a justification to deny permanent alimony to the respondent.

9. Considering the rival contentions of the learned Advocates on behalf of both the parties, and on perusal of the records, the following points arise for our determination:-

1. Whether the appellant has
established that the respondent had
deserted the matrimonial house and the
appellant over a period of two years
prior to the filing of the petition
without any justifiable reason or
proper cause, and therefore, warrants
decree of divorce under Section
13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955?

2. Whether the appellant has
established cruelty by the respondent
to the appellant within the meaning of
the said expression under Section
13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, and therefore, warrants
dissolution of the marriage by divorce
under the said provisions of law ?

3. Whether the materials on record
justify the grant of permanent alimony
in favour of the respondent to the
extent of Rs.1,000/- per month ?

10. Perusal of the materials on record reveals that the conduct of the respondent consistently discloses that she was never interested in returning to the matrimonial house after she had left the same on 23rd December, 1993. The finding arrived at by the Family Court regarding attempt on the part of the respondent to prevent the marriage being broken up is not only contrary to the materials on record but it is totally perverse. It discloses total misreading of the evidence on record. The finding regarding harassment to the respondent by the appellant is also not based on any material on record. Before arriving at any such finding, the Family Court has not taken pains to refer to any incident of harassment to the respondent. The Family Court also erred in totally ignoring the clear admission on the part of the respondent that she had never gone to the matrimonial house after December, 1994. There was a clear statement to that effect in the proceedings for judicial separation and the same was confirmed in the present proceedings. In fact, the Family Court does not appear to have understood the concept of cruelty at all. The issue regarding cruelty has been answered in the negative holding that the appellant has not proved any act on the part of the respondent amounting to cruelty. In fact, the cruelty pleaded and established is not a physical cruelty but it relates to the conduct of the respondent which amounted to mental torture to the appellant.

11. As regards the point of desertion is concerned, undisputedly, the respondent proceeded to her parent’s house from the matrimonial house on 24th December, 1993 and thereafter, she did not return to reside with the appellant. Besides, while she continued to reside with her parents, she filed petition for judicial separation being Petition No.656 of 1994 on 22nd September, 1994. The said petition was followed by the criminal complaint dated 25th September, 1994 against the appellant and his parents i.e. in-laws of the respondent. It is undisputed fact that consequent to the said complaint under Section 498A of I.P.C., the appellant was arrested. It was only after the dismissal of the said petition for judicial separation i.e. on 28th July, 1995, that the respondent claimed to have approached the appellant for settlement.

12. As regards the claim of settlement is concerned, there is not even a statement that she of her own went to her matrimonial house on 29th July, 1995. On the contrary, a categorical statement in her testimony is that she was brought to her matrimonial house by her brother. It is, however, pertinent to note that neither the brother nor any other witness was examined in support of the said contention. Undisputedly, the allegation in that regard has been denied by the appellant. Added to this, there were categorical admissions on the part of the respondent to the effect that "Since 1996 December myself and opponent had not resided together at any time", and further that "I have not given any offer to the Petitioner that I wanted to reside with me." In addition, she has also stated that "it is true that I am ready for decree of divorce if all my golden ornaments and articles are given to me by the Petitioner and the expenses incurred by me in respect of maintenance and marriage expenses."

13. It is well settled principle of law that the point regarding desertion is to be decided on the basis of the inference to be drawn from the facts brought on record. Neither brother of the respondent nor any other person has been examined in order to establish the claim regarding attempt on the part of the respondent for reconciliation after disposal of the petition for judicial separation. That apart, the very fact that the respondent after having left the matrimonial house on 24th December, 1993 did not return to the said house till the filing of the petition for judicial separation or any time thereafter, and further filing of the petition for judicial separation discloses her clear intention to desert the appellant and the matrimonial house right from the time when she left the matrimonial house, i.e. on 24th December, 1993. This inference from the evidence on record is inevitable in view of above referred facts which also finds support from the further acts on the part of the respondent whereby after filing of the petition for judicial separation, the respondent also filed a criminal complaint under Section 498A of I.P.C., consequent to which the appellant was arrested. It is also undisputed fact that the said complaint was ultimately dismissed and the appellant was acquitted by the learned Magistrate. This being an appeal, which is a continuation of the original proceedings, relevant facts which have occurred subsequent to the disposal of the proceedings before the Lower Court cannot be ignored and merely because the order of acquittal has been delivered after the disposal of the proceedings before the Lower Court, the benefit thereof cannot be denied to the appellant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, it is apparent that the criminal complaint filed against the appellant could not be established by the appellant. Evidently, the allegations against the appellant were not established to be true.

14. The evidence regarding leaving of the matrimonial house on 24th December, 1993 and filing of the petition for judicial separation in the month of September, 1994 followed by the criminal complaint, which came to be dismissed subsequently, obviously disclose on one hand desertion of the appellant and the matrimonial house by the respondent and on the other hand causing of mental cruelty to the appellant by the respondent.

15. The Apex Court in Kameswara Rao’s case (supra) had clearly held that filing of the false police complaint results in loss of reputation and standing in society at the instance of one’s spouse, and that amount to mental cruelty and the traumatic experience which the husband had to undergo on account of the allegations which could not be proved certainly results in mental cruelty to the husband by the wife.

16. The Supreme Court in V.Bhagat v. D.Bhagat, [(1994)1 SCC 337] has clearly held that "the mental cruelty in Section 13(1)(i-a) can broadly be defined as that conduct which inflicts upon the other party such mental pain and suffering as would make it not possible for that party to live with the other. In other words, mental cruelty must be of such a nature that the parties cannot reasonably be expected to live together. The situation must be such that the wronged party cannot reasonably be asked to put up with such conduct and continue to live with the other party. It is not necessary to prove that the mental cruelty is such as to cause injury to the health of the petitioner. While arriving at such conclusion, regard must be had to the social status, educational level of the parties, the society they move in, the possibility or otherwise of the parties ever living together in case they are already living apart and all other relevant facts and circumstances which it is neither possible nor desirable to set out exhaustively. What is cruelty in one case may not amount to cruelty in another case. It is a matter to be determined in each case having regard to the facts and circumstances of that case. If it is a case of accusations and allegations, regard must also be had to the context in which they were made."

17. The Apex Court in Adhyatma Bhattar
Alwar’s case (supra) has held that :-

""Desertion" in the context of
matrimonial law represents a legal
conception. It is difficult to give a
comprehensive definition of the term.
The essential ingredients of this
offence in order that it may furnish a
ground for relief are:

1. the factum of separation;

2. the intention to bring cohabitation
permanently to an end- animus deserendi;

3. the element of permanence which is
a prime condition requires that both
these essential ingredients should
continue during the entire statutory
period;

The clause lays down the rule that desertion to amount to a matrimonial offence must be for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition. This clause has to be read with the Explanation. The Explanation has widened the definition of desertion to include "wilful neglect" of the petitioning spouse by the respondent. It states that to amount to a matrimonial offence desertion must be without reasonable cause and without the consent or against the wish of the petitioner. From the Explanation it is abundantly clear that the legislature intended to give to the expression a wide import which includes wilful neglect of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage. Therefore, for the offence of desertion, so far as the deserting spouse is concerned, two essential conditions must be there, namely, (1) the factum of separation, and (2) the intention to bring cohabitation permanently to an end (animus deserendi). Similarly, two elements are essential so far as the deserted spouse is concerned: (1) the absence of consent, and (2) absence of conduct giving reasonable cause to the spouse leaving the matrimonial home to form the necessary intention aforesaid. The petition for divorce bears the burden of proving those elements in the two spouses respectively and their continuance throughout the statutory period."

18. In Smt.Kalpana Srivastava’s case (supra), the Allahabad High Court had held that cruelty is not confined to physical cruelty, but includes mental cruelty. In Rajkishore Prasad’s case (supra), the Patna High Court had held that wife leaving her matrimonial home without any reason or without being driven out and staying separately for two years clearly justifies decree of divorce.

19. Bearing in mind the law laid down by the Apex Court, it is apparent from the materials on record in the case in hand that after leaving the matrimonial house on 24th December, 1993, there was absolutely no attempt on the part of the respondent to reconcile with the appellant or to return to the matrimonial house. Added to this, in September, 1994, she proceeded to file proceedings for judicial separation which obviously disclosed that she was no more interested in joining the appellant and she wanted to disassociate herself from the appellant. The intention as well as action in pursuance of the said intention to desert the appellant and the matrimonial house was therefore very clear from the conduct of the respondent revealed from the day of leaving the matrimonial house i.e. on 24th December, 1993. None of the allegations in the criminal complaint against the appellant and his parents could be established by the respondent and they were acquitted. The parties to the proceedings are educated persons. The filing of the criminal complaint subsequent to the petition for judicial separation obviously disclosed further intention on the part of the respondent to pressurise the appellant to agree for separation, as rightly contended by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant. The conduct of the respondent, therefore, leaves no room for doubt but to conclude that the same clearly establishes desertion of the appellant for more than two years prior to the filing of the petition for divorce as well as mental cruelty to the appellant.

20. The evidence on record also discloses the attitude on the part of the respondent which was of non-cooperation prior to the day of her leaving matrimonial house. Having agreed to marry with the appellant and to reside with him in his house, it was obvious for the appellant to expect the respondent to follow certain traditions and customs which are followed consequent to the marriage in the family of the appellant but the respondent having refused to participate and cooperate in performing such traditions and customs, it obviously disclosed not only un-cooperative and adamant attitude on the part of the respondent but also caused dissatisfaction to the appellant and thereby being responsible for creating unhappy situation and in the process, if the displeasure was expressed by the appellant, he could not have been blamed. Being so, some minor incidents of quarrels which might have taken place prior to the leaving of the matrimonial house, by no stretch of imagination, could be said to be a sufficient cause for the wife to leave the matrimonial house, and if the cause was a creation of the acts on the part of the respondent herself, she cannot seek to derive any benefit out of the result of such acts to justify the factum of leaving of the matrimonial house on 23rd December, 1993.

21. The learned Single Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Girdhari Lal v. Santosh Kumari, reported in (1982)1 D.M.C. 180, had held that filing of a false complaint would amount to cruelty. The Division Bench of this Court in Sadhana Satish Kolvankar’s case (supra) while rejecting the contention that filing of the complaint under Section 498A of I.P.C. should not be given much importance as the said decision had delivered after the disposal of the petition by the Trial Court and during the pendency of the appeal, held that "all material which is logically probative for a prudent mind cannot be excluded from consideration while arriving at a decision. There cannot be any allergy to look into such material, provided it has a reasonable nexus and credibility. The essence of judicial approach is objectivity, exclusion of extraneous matters from consideration and observance of rules of natural justice. In our view, on these tests, the respondent cannot be denied the opportunity to rely upon this order." Indeed, the order of acquittal of the appellant though has been delivered subsequent to the decision by the trial Court, the same cannot be ignored, as already held above, as the same obviously relevant while dealing with the allegation of cruelty and defence sought to be raised in that regard by the respondent.

22. For the reasons stated above, therefore, it cannot be said that the appellant had failed to discharge his burden to establish the ingredients of the grounds for desertion and cruelty for the purpose of divorce.. The point Nos.1 and 2 framed above are therefore answered in affirmative.

23. As far as granting alimony is concerned, taking into consideration the amount of alimony being Rs.1,000/-, no doubt, finds it to be either unreasonable or exhorbitant and hence no interference is called for, in that regard. The point No.3 is therefore answered in negative.

24. For the reasons stated above, therefore, the Appeal partly succeeds. The impugned judgment of dismissal of petition for divorce is hereby quashed and set aside. The petition filed by the appellant for dissolution of the marriage on the ground of desertion and cruelty is to be allowed and accordingly is hereby allowed. The order of grant of permanent alimony of Rs.1,000/- to the respondent is, however, not interfered with. There shall be no order as to costs.

( Anoop V.Mohta, J )
( R.M.S.Khandeparkar, J )

bombay HC - FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.41 OF 2003

From the Judis database.


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO.41 OF 2003

Sou. Medha Gaurav Talekar .. .. Appellant

Versus

Shri Gaurav Kaluram Talekar .. ..Respondent

Mr.M.R. Katikar for Appellant.
Mr.M.R. Deshpande for Respondent.

-----

CORAM : J.N. PATEL &
SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, JJ.
Dated : 4 th April, 2007

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Smt.Roshan Dalvi, J.)

1. This Appeal challenges the ex-parte judgment and order passed on 12.7.2001 by the Family Court No.2, Pune, granting the decree of divorce to the Respondent (husband) under the provisions of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

2. The parties were marred on 13.5.1999 according to Hindu vedic rites. It was alleged by the Respondent in the Petition filed in the Family Court that the Appellant (wife) left the matrimonial home and went to reside with her maternal uncle from 22.5.1999. The parties never lived together since then. After the Petition came to be filed for divorce, writ of summons was served upon the Respondent (wife) by Registered Post. It has been received by her on 3.10.2000. She did not appear in Court at any time and did not file her Written Statement . The averment s made in the Petition remained uncontroverted. The Petitioner has been granted a decree of divorce upon such uncontroverted averments.

3. It is the case of the Appellant (wife) that, in fact, after filing of the divorce Petition, the parties co-habited together and she has also given birth to a child during the pendency of the Petition. She was informed by the Respondent (husband) that he would not pursue the Petition and hence, she never attended the Court. In those circumstances, the decree, if any, obtained by the Respondent (husband) would be taken to be obtained by fraud and that would leave to her the only remedy of filing a Suit for setting aside that decree, which was fraudulently obtained.

4. She has further contended that she received the notice of the Petition on the date when the Petition was fixed for hearing and has consequently alleged that the husband obtained a decree after misleading her and suppres sing true facts.

5.We have gone through the Roznama maintained by the Family Court. The Roznama shows that the Petition having been presented on 28.8.2000. The notice was issued upon the Respondent (wife) for service of the Petition to be effected upon her on 9.9.2000. The Petition reached hearing on 6.10.2000 when it was adjourned for awaiting service. The Petition thereafter reached hearing on 20.11.2000, when the notice duly served upon the Appellant (wife) was received showing the service by R.P.A.D. made upon her on 30.10.2000. On 2.1.2001, the Petition was adjourned for Counsellor's report. Thereafter the Petition was adjourned for filing a Written Statement on 8.2.2001. Since the Appellant (wife) never appeared in Court and did not file her Written Statement, the Petitioner made an application for an ex-parte order on 20.3.2001. The Petition was adjourned to 16.6.2001 for ex-parte hearing. Deposition of Witness No.1 was recorded on that date. Notice to the Respondent was issued. On 22.6.2001, an aknowledgement of the receipt of the Notice was received. Evidence of the Petitioner was closed. The matter was adjourned to 22.6.2001 for exparte judgment when the judgment was pronounced in the open Court.

6.We find that the Trial Court followed due legal procedure and passed the decree correctly.

7.We may mention that there were certain proceedings under Section 498- A of the Indian Penal Code initiated by the wife which were prosecuted by her and which resulted an acquittal of the Respondent (husband). The case of the wife that the parties co-habited together and wanted to continue the marriage, cannot be accepted. The judgment and order impugned in this case cannot be challenged.

The Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.

(J.N. PATEL, J.)

(SMT.ROSHAN DALVI, J.)

http://bombayhighcourt.nic.in/data/judgements/2007/CFCA490802.pdf

Comments By the blogger :
- Pertinent to note that the accused here was NOT married to the woman. He was just engaged
- A dowry case has been filed EVEN BEFORE marriage !!!.
- While I do NOT know the facts of the case, it is interesting to note that sec 498A, the notoriously misused Anti dowry section, has NOT been mentioned below & warrants are issued one year later.

Please post a comment if you know this case or have some idea on the details.



News item From Zee News . Com

Arrest warrant against IFS officer, kin in dowry case

Darbhanga (Bihar), May 07:

A local court here Monday issued a warrants of arrest against an Indian Foreign Service officer, his parents and brother in a dowry and intimidation case involving breaking of engagement.

Chief judicial magistrate of Darbhanga B K Srivastavaa ordered issuing of warrants against Amit Mishra, an IFS officer posted in Delhi, his father Devchandra Mishra, mother Narayani Mishra and brother Abhay Mishra under IPC and dowry act following a prayer made by superintendent of police K S Anupam yesterday, official sources said.

The warrants have been issued under Sections 406 (criminal breach of trust), 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), 506 (criminal intimidation), 509 (word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman), 120 (b) (criminal) conspiracy) of IPC and Anti-Dowry Act.

Mishra and his family were accused of having demanded Rs 1 crore as dowry from the family of Rachna Kumari, daughter of Shanker Jha of Bengali Tola and the FIR was registered against the accused with the Lehariasarai police station on December 25 last year following the intervention of the National Commission For Women (NCW).

According to the FIR, father of Rachna approached Amit and his family with a marriage proposal after which the parents of the ifs officer asked for a meeting with the bride-to-be.

The engagement took place at Birla temple in Nangloi in Delhi and the marriage was fixed for March six last year.

Bureau Report

http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?rep=2&aid=370106&sid=NAT&ssid=

Nawada Jail superintendent's son, a Wipro employee, in Dowry case !!!!

Comments by the blogger : Police have arrested Kaushal Kishore, a software engineer working for Wipro, after Neetu, his wife, accused him on dowry and child issues. As far as we know NOTHING has been proven against this husband. Now, the wife is filing further cases against the husband who is in jail.


News item From Patna Daily . com

Patna: May 7, 2007

Janardan Singh, the father of Preeti Singh, a.k.a. Neetu Singh, approached Patna police on Monday saying he and his daughter were threatened by four-five unidentified men on Monday night demanding to withdraw case against her husband or be prepared to face the consequences.

"These men came to our house and threatened us of dire results if we did not withdraw the case against Neetu's husband Kaushal Kishore and his father Dashrath Prasad Singh. Furthermore, we are getting many threatening phone calls that has put us under tremendous pressure and worries," Janardan Singh said.

As reported before, the police arrested Kaushal Kishore, a software engineer working for Wipro, on Sunday after Neetu accused him and his in-laws of torturing her on dowry and child issues.

Meanwhile, officials at Beur Jail denied giving special treatment to Kaushal on the ground his father Dashrath Prasad Singh is the Superintendent of Nawada Jail.

"He is being treated as any ordinary prisoner," Beur Jail superintendent Dilip Kumar said.

http://www.patnadaily.com/news2007/may/050707/dowry_abuse_wife_afraid.html

HC discharges parents, brother and paternal uncle of the Husband. Husband alone to continue the battle !!

........."So far as involvement of other relatives including father, mother, uncle and husband's brother are concerned the evidence is vague, sketchy and unspecific. Therefore, they are entitled to be given the benefit of discharge," Justice Bhat added..........



PTI

Saturday, May 12, 2007 16:05 IST

NEW DELHI:

In yet another case of dowry death, the Delhi High Court has rejected the plea of a husband for quashing the charges framed by the trial court saying there was a proximate and live link among the effect of cruelty, dowry demand and the death of his wife.

Justice Ravinder Bhat, however, discharged the parents, brother and paternal uncle of the accused, Ram Dayal Meena, of the dowry harassment charges after he found scanty evidence against them.

"The parents of the deceased spoke with less particulars but nevertheless clearly mentioning the role of husband Ram Dayal Meena as demanding dowry. Therefore, the charges framed against husband under sections 498(A)(cruelty) and 304(B)(dowry death) of IPC are justified," Justice Bhat said in a recent judgment.

"So far as involvement of other relatives including father, mother, uncle and husband's brother are concerned the evidence is vague, sketchy and unspecific. Therefore, they are entitled to be given the benefit of discharge," Justice Bhat added.

According to prosecution, Meena had committed suicide a year after her marriage in May, 2004. Her parents had lodged an FIR accusing him and his relatives for harassing their daughter for dowry.


http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1096390

Engineer, parents held for [alleged ?] dowry death in Ghaziabad

Comments from the Blogger :

I agree that Dowry is bad. It IS evil. I have NO sympathy for the dowry taker OR the Giver

But how do we tolerate completely one sided news ??

The Husband and family are suspected in a murder, while they MAY HAVE BEEN completely unaware of it.

The news item below or the ORIGINAL headline on Express India site state nothing about the accused's [husband's] version.

Some how media in India fail to give the accused's view thereby converting such news into "trail by media". The sadder part is that they seem to be getting away with it

Looks like the police are in a great hurry to nab everyone. Luckily a 16 month old kid is still spared, but police seem to be looking out for the kid's sole caretaker





Engineer, parents held for [alleged ?] dowry death in Ghaziabad

http://cities.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=236313


Neeraj Chauhan

Ghaziabad, May 14:

AN engineer and his parents have been arrested after the dismembered body of the former’s wife was found near the railway track at Razapur crossing here last Thursday. It is believed that the victim, Shobhana Singh (25), was killed for dowry.

Dhimant Singh Rawat, 27, is an engineer in a private firm while his father Balwant Singh Rawat is a manager at a fibreglass factory. Dhimant’s mother Madhur has also been arrested but his sister Madhuri is at large. She is thought to have Dhimant’s 16-month-old son Anant with her.

Dhimant and his parents have been arrested on the basis of a police complaint by Shobhana’s father Subhash Chand Singh, who owns an inverter and generator factory in Bahadurgarh. The Singhs were told last Thursday that Shobhana was missing and were informed the following day that she had committed suicide.

“They told us that our daughter is missing since May 10 evening but when we reached their house, they were relaxed and having dinner,” said Pramod Singh, Shobhana’s uncle and a resident of Sharjah in the UAE. “We had given them Rs 10 lakh cash, half kg gold and a Santro car but they harassed her from day one,” he added.

Singh went on to say that the Rawats would criticise Shobhana over everything, including the way she walked. Shobhana, a B.Com graduate from Shyama Prasad Mukherjee College in Delhi University, married Dhimant on February 15, 2004. The match was arranged by a family friend in Kanpur.

Shobhana’s school friend Varsha Sonany adds: “She was never allowed to talk to anyone and not allowed to go out alone. We met only once after her marriage but she used to share her worries with me only. She was in pain.” Varsha said Shobhana never complained to her parents as she did not want to embarrass them.

Shobhana’s family stays in Sector 6 at Bahadurgarh. Her brother Vikram is doing his graduation from Hansraj College in Delhi University while Shobhana was doing her M. Com from Himachal University. The Singhs belong to Jaunpur and live in a kothi on a 500 sq yards plot at Kavi Nagar. Dhimant and his sister Madhuri have studied from Delhi Public School, Ghaziabad.

When the police are on the receiving end !! : Inspector held for dowry harassment

News from "The Hindu"

Inspector held for dowry harassment

Staff Reporter

BANGALORE: The Vijayanagar police on Monday arrested Fraser Town Police Inspector N. Srinidhi on the charge of torturing his wife for more dowry.

The police have also arrested Srinidhi's mother, Jayalakshamma, and brother, Sreenivasa.

On a complaint by Srinidhi's wife, Jyothishree, the Vijayanagar police registered a case against the three under the Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (husband or relative of the husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) and also under the Dowry Prohibition Act, Deputy Commissioner of Police (West) K.V. Sharathchandra said.

In her complaint, Ms. Jyothishree has said that her husband was torturing her for a dowry of Rs. 5 lakh. Besides, he was allegedly beating her on the instigation of his mother.

Ms. Jyothishree, who is admitted to hospital, has complained that her husband assaulted her on Saturday as she had not polished his shoes and kept his uniform ready.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/05/15/stories/2007051518710300.htm

Husband seeks maintenance

Husband seeks maintenance

16 May, 2007 l 0027 hrs ISTlDhananjay Mahapatra /TIMES NEWS NETWORK

NEW DELHI: Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code has frequently been used by courts to ask men to pay maintenance to wives, children or parents dumped by them.

A petition in the Supreme Court seeks a role reversal — a man wants maintenance from his doctor wife who allegedly deserted him at a time when he was jobless.

The Hindu Marriage Act does allow for the payment of maintenance to separated and divorced males who have no means to support themselves and whose estranged partners are better off. But Section 125 of has seldom been used for the purpose.

Interestingly, while invoking Section 125, petitioner Pravinkumar Jayantilal Nagrecha also blames his plight on the misuse of the very provision by his wife.

It was in 2002 that a Rajkot court directed Nagrecha to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs 1,000 to his wife and daughter even though she is working as a doctor. This order was upheld by the high court and the apex court, his counsel H A Raichura said.

He said the petitioner was sacked by Reliance in 2002, as he had to take frequent leave to attend as many as 15 court cases in three cities filed against him by his wife.

Seeking to get 'relief' under Section 125, the petitioner said the apex court should interpret the law in such a manner that destitute husbands could also get maintenance if their working wives had left, leaving them in penury.

If the law isn't interpreted in this way, Section 125 could fall foul of the mandate of the Constitution which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex — in other words, between husband and wife — the petitioner said.

When this is the plight of entire state populations, .....

In many parts of India there is absolutely NO law and order.

Either the Law and order machinery is totally corrupt and inefficient or it is sidelined by the politicians who work with the gundas

See report below on the state of Uttar Pradesh, the most populous in India

When such is the plight of entire state populations, what will individual husbands falsely charged with 498A do ??

The same police who are corrupt, politicised and inefficient find another lucrative chance to milk innocent husbands and their families



http://www.indianexpress.com/story/30696.html

............ For instance, the notorious Raghuraj Pratap Singh alias Raja Bhaiyya, who was jailed by Mayawati under POTA, was made a minister in the Mulayam cabinet.

Mukhtar Ansari, charged in the sensational murder of BJP MLA Krishnanand Rai, enjoyed state security.

The Chief Minister fought the Opposition’s demand for a CBI inquiry into Rai’s murder tooth and nail till the High Court ordered it.

Also, more than 2,000 gunners were provided to Samajwadi Party “leaders” of various “ranks” in the state.

There were countless incidents involving gun-toting leaders, known as “contractor mafia” in UP, thrashing government officials and policemen on duty and getting away with it.

Numerous were also instances of policemen found involved in heinous crimes.

The utter failure of the law and order machinery, .............

Verdict from People of Delhi : DV is being and will be misused !!!!

Friends

This is my open letter to the Editor of "The Hindu". I am sending this to thehindu@vsnl.com and letters@thehindu.co.in

Please blog my open letter wherever possible.

Also forward this to thehindu@vsnl.com AND OTHER MEDIA PEOPLE, editors immediately.

You may use your name if you so wish to and I hold NO copyrights or warranties for this letter

================== Open letter to The Hindu ===================

From

Vinayak
Tamil Nadu
India - 610001


To
The Editor
The Hindu,
859\860 Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 002


Dear Editor

This has reference to your news item at
http://www.hindu.com/2007/05/12/stories/2007051219930300.htm
on the DV act

Your news paper is known for accuracy in reporting and high standards. Please do NOT associate your name with casual researchers who have NOT understood ground realities. Your news paper should NOT be misleading your readers.

The researcher in the above article claims "Delhiites continue to have misconceptions about the law" and goes on to state that people in Delhi are worried about the Misuse of DV [Domestic Violence Act] act

This researcher has drawn completely wrong conclusions while the public at large are right in concluding that Domestic Violence act is being and will be misused.

The Indian family is the bedrock of our traditions and continuity since vedic times. Since time immemorial our families have ensured the continuation of our scriptures and traditions. Vedas and prabhandhams and thirumarais and thiruvaimozi passed from father to son. Our culture passed from mother to daughter.

Rama was always revereared WITH Sita, Lakmana, Bharatha, Chatruguna and Hanuman.

All this being challenged by Ultra feminist and male hating agenda which has led to the gender biased, wife supporting legislation like the DV act

Even before the DV act was promulgated, section 498A of IPC was grossly misused

I am sure that eminent speakers like Cho N Ramaswamy, eminent Jurists like the Honbl. Shri Markandeya Katju, the Supreme court of India and others have spoken against the gross misuse of the Section 498A of IPC - also dubbed as false dwory cases

While false dowry cases are piling in court corridors, the DV act is another draconian law, which

- allows ONLY women to file complaints

- makes ONLY men punishable (by virtue of being defendants)

and completely ignores the fundamental righs guaranteed to all citizens, be it men, be it elderly parents of men or their siblings

[...there are many more anomalies in this hasty and shoddy piece of legislation.....]

I urge you immediately remove such "snake oil" from your august pages and also publish a corrigendum immediately dis associating yourself from such spurious reports and self styled researches


Regards
Vinayak
May 13th 2007

================== news item on The Hindu ========================


http://www.hindu.com/2007/05/12/stories/2007051219930300.htm

New Delhi

Focus on Protection of Women from Violence Act

P. Anima

`Delhiites continue to have misconceptions about the law'


NEW DELHI: More than a year after the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) was passed by Parliament, Delhiites continue to have misconceptions about the law, with most of them believing the Act is going to be rampantly misused, reveals a new study by the Centre for Media Studies (CMS), a research organisation here in the Capital.

The latest study on "Knowledge and awareness on Domestic Violence and Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005" was conducted to gauge general public knowledge and awareness about the PWDVA among the people of Delhi and some districts of Punjab.

More than 50.7 per cent of the 513 people interviewed in Delhi for the in-house study said they had heard about the Act. But while 46.6 per cent of them understood domestic violence to be lack of understanding between husband and wife, some confused it with property disputes or conflicts in the husband's family. "It is the crux of the Act that people have failed to understand," said senior researcher Chittaranjan Mishra who co-ordinated the study, completed a week ago.

"There are a number of civil measures in the Act that complement the existing criminal aspects," he added.

The thrust of Act that seeks correction of the perpetrator's behaviour more than punitive measures is lost on the people. Though more than 80 per cent of the respondents have heard, seen or were aware of domestic violence, according to them a significant number of victims (25.4 per cent) did not approach anyone for help, while a few others turned to friends and relatives.

Though 42.5 per cent of the victims approached the police, 421 respondents said that in 50.6 per cent of the cases no action was taken against the perpetrators. Interestingly, the study points out that the primary reason for inaction was mutual compromise arrived at by the parties concerned.

Mutual compromise was arrived at in more that 50 per cent cases and money was used in 16.9 per cent instances to withdraw the case.

Significantly, the respondents felt women belonging to the upper class were most likely to make use of the Act, in contrast to women of lower and middle classes.

But a whopping 60.8 per cent of the respondents in Delhi believed that the Act would be rampantly misused.

A large section of them (59.9 per cent) believed the Act would be misused intentionally.


==============================================================

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2007/20070511/region.htm

Husband burnt by wife and in-laws :

A man was set ablaze by his wife, mother-in-law and brothers-in-law at Kasba Mohalla, Dasuya yesterday.

According to the police, Harmesh Kumar (35) son of Surinder Kumar of Kasba Mohalla, alleged that his wife Shama alias Umma, mother-in-law Kanta, brother-in-law Vinod Kumar and Mintu, cousin brother of his wife, all of Jhangia, sprinkled kerosene on him while he was taking rest on a cot at his house and set him ablaze.

He was seriously burnt and was admitted in Civil Hospital, Dasuya where his condition is critical.

blogger's comments

More and more women are acting like Jhanvi Kapoor these days. They divorce their legally married husbands, take the kid away and wish to marry a superstar to make it big. Many frustrated ones file FALSE dowry cases and other defamatory cases. Many try to commit suicide just to attract attention. If these trial suicides go wrong, they die making the man legally liable to prosecution and suspicions. Now Jahnvi has another twist

Ex-husband indulging in defamation: Jahnvi

11 May, 2007 l 0340 hrs ISTlTIMES NEWS NETWORK

LUCKNOW:

After the sordid suicide drama on the night of Abhishek Bachchan’s marriage right in front of his Juhu bungalow, Jahnvi Kapoor nee Haya Rizvi finds herself in the thick of a courtroom battle for the custody of her ten years old son.

Soon after, Ali Hussain Naqvi, son of the noted Shia cleric Maulana Kalbe Sadiq and her former husband, moved a habeas corpus petition in Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court, Jahnvi played a harried and helpless mother to the hilt when she called up The Times of India, Lucknow, office on Thursday.

Accusing Naqvi of conspiring to sabotage her Bollywood career, Jahnvi claimed that the petition was just another stunt to bring infamy to her. "The only reason why this person has filed the case is that he would like to see me cringe and I refuse to do so," she said.

For a change, the woman did not pretend that she had never known Naqvi as she had claimed before the national media earlier. Accusing him of worst possible crimes, the former wife claimed, "If Naqvi was not behind the bars, it was only due to the proximity of his family with the Samajwadi Party supremo."

"How come this gentleman transform into a caring father almost overnight?" she asked. "What happened during the intervening ten years when he didn’t not pay a single penny for the child’s maintenance," she added.

She said, "Naqvi wanted the child back because his second wife could not produce an heir to the family fortune. He has only three daughters," she said. Asked if she would be coming to Lucknow to appear in the court, Jahnvi said that she would be represented by her mother.




More and more women are acting like Jhanvi Kapoor these days. They divorce their legally married husbands, take the kid away and wish to marry a superstar to make it big. Many frustrated ones file FALSE dowry cases and other defamatory cases. Many try to commit suicide just to attract attention. If these trial suicides go wrong, they die making the man legally liable to prosecution and suspicions. Now Jahnvi has another twist

Ex-husband indulging in defamation: Jahnvi

11 May, 2007 l 0340 hrs ISTlTIMES NEWS NETWORK

LUCKNOW:

After the sordid suicide drama on the night of Abhishek Bachchan’s marriage right in front of his Juhu bungalow, Jahnvi Kapoor nee Haya Rizvi finds herself in the thick of a courtroom battle for the custody of her ten years old son.

Soon after, Ali Hussain Naqvi, son of the noted Shia cleric Maulana Kalbe Sadiq and her former husband, moved a habeas corpus petition in Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court, Jahnvi played a harried and helpless mother to the hilt when she called up The Times of India, Lucknow, office on Thursday.

Accusing Naqvi of conspiring to sabotage her Bollywood career, Jahnvi claimed that the petition was just another stunt to bring infamy to her. "The only reason why this person has filed the case is that he would like to see me cringe and I refuse to do so," she said.

For a change, the woman did not pretend that she had never known Naqvi as she had claimed before the national media earlier. Accusing him of worst possible crimes, the former wife claimed, "If Naqvi was not behind the bars, it was only due to the proximity of his family with the Samajwadi Party supremo."

"How come this gentleman transform into a caring father almost overnight?" she asked. "What happened during the intervening ten years when he didn’t not pay a single penny for the child’s maintenance," she added.

She said, "Naqvi wanted the child back because his second wife could not produce an heir to the family fortune. He has only three daughters," she said. Asked if she would be coming to Lucknow to appear in the court, Jahnvi said that she would be represented by her mother.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Lucknow/Ex-husband_indulging_in_defamation_Jahnvi/articleshow/2030437.cms

Notes by the Blogger :

Irate young wives are filing scores of false dowry cases. Search Google or Blogs for the worlds FALSE dowry and you will be surprised by the number of hits. 10s of 1000s of families are in turmoil. Ordinary matrimonial affairs are being criminalised. Elders are being arrested like common criminals. In this connection if it important to understand how corrupt our law enforcement is and how an arrest can affect the psyche and social standing of honest men and women.

'Is it right to parade accused before the public?'

HindustanTimes ePaper

A FEW days ago, Deepak Behl, accused of pushing his fiancee from the fifth floor of her house, was caught unawares when he was paraded in front of cameras in a police station in Karol Bagh. Even though the police had registered a case of murder, there were claims that his fianc6e had accidentally fallen after they had a fight. But his face was already on TV screens and in newspapers.

In the case of Nithari killings suspect Moninder Singh Pandher, things went a little out of control when he was attacked by the public on the premises of the Ghaziabad court. It was a rare incident and provided camerapersons an opportunity to 'click away'.

As people accused of rape, murder and dowry death increasingly find themselves facing the camera, the question arises: is it ethical to parade the accused in front of the public and the media without their faces covered?

Experts are of the view that it is not only against the principles of justice, but also hampers trial. Pandher's case demonstrates that it can also lead to law and order problems. Senior advocate K.T.S. Tulsi says, "It is stupidity on the part of the police to produce the accused with faces uncovered. In such situations, the identification of the accused by the victim becomes a futile exercise and it is against the principles of justice."

Former Commissioner of Delhi Police Ajai Raj Sharma agrees, "Once the accused are sent in judicial custody they have to be identified by the victim in the presence of a magistrate. But with pictures of the accused flashing all over, the identification process is meaningless."

Tulsi goes a step further and blames the media. He says the media should realise that by showing such pictures, they are demolishing the presumption of innocence granted to the accused in such cases until they are proved guilty

But others say that there is no provision that the face of the accused should be covered. "Only in situations where identity is doubtful are faces required to be covered. There should be no problem in displaying the faces of the accused as it could be a deterrent for others," says Ashok Arora, advocate and former secretary of the Supreme Court Bar Association.

Additional Commissioner of Police Deependra Pathak says that they follow the legal requirements. "Faces are covered in cases where identification is required. In other cases it is a personal choice of the accused. But the media should refrain from showing pictures of the accused," said Pathak.

And how does it affect the accused? Psychologists like Samir Parikh say that "branding of an individual a culprit", especially in cases when one is acquitted later, often has a long-lasting harmful effect on his or her personalities. "People can suffer from mental trauma and lose confidence. The families of the accused also suffer from mental trauma," says Parikh.

abhishek.bhalla@hindustantimes.com

http://epaper.hindustantimes.com/artMailDisp.aspx?article=12_05_2007_005_001&typ=1&pub=47

Actor Prashanth hit by dowry case. Dad Thyagarajan, mother Shanthi on wife's attack list.

Actor Prashanth hit by dowry case. Dad Thyagarajan, mother Shanthi on wife's attack list. Wife files case many months after leaving his house and when there is a civil case in progress !!

Prashants cup of woes increase

May 10, 2007, 11:29

Tamil actor Prashanth said that he has done no wrong and it was his wife Grahalakshmi who worsened the situation between them. He said, 'I would like to live with her even now but her parents wont allow her to live with my family.

I wouldn’t like to comment on this issue since the case is in court. It is not at all a problem for me to take care of matters in court', the actor said after he submitted his anticipatory bail petition in court.

For several months now, Prashanth and Grahalakshmi have been living separately. Her family has not allowed him to even see his child. Following this, Prashanth filed a petition in a family court to allow his wife to live with him and for him to get visitation rights of his child.

The judge arranged for Prashanth and his wife to solve the problem via an arbitratory plea but that didn’t yield a solution.

While this was going on, two days back his wife Grahalakshmi has filed a dowry harassment case against him before the City Commissioner of Police, Latika Saran. Following this complaint, there were 5 cases registered under different sections against Prashanth and his family members including his mother Shanthi, father Thiagarajan and sister Preethi. It is alleged that Prashanth's family members have disappeared suddenly from their residence soon after the police filed the cases formally.

To avoid the arrest in this case, Prashanth and his family moved an anticipatory Bail petition in the Court. In that petition, Prashanth mentioned, “Grahalakshmi did not suffer due my actions or the actions of my family members. In fact, my parents treated like their daughter. We never forced Grahalakshmi to go out of my house. She took her own decision and settled with her parents. It is me, who voluntarily requested the court to help us get our relationship back on track. No one in my family has tortured Grahalakshmi for dowry and the entire state has knows my status in the society. Please don't encourage the false allegations made by Grahalakshmi and grant us the bail against any police action.'

Court rejects Prashanth's petition for bail

The Madras High Court has rejected the petition of Prashanth, seeking anticipatory bail for him and his family in a case registered by the Chennai police on the basis of his wife's complaint. It further ordered Prashanth to stay in Chennai till the next hearing of the case.

After hearing the petition the High Court has ordered the actor, his family members and his wife Grahalakshmi along with child to appear in the Court on 30 th of this month. A fresh arbitration will be arranged for reuniting the family. If the discussions fails, the Court will decide their future.

http://www.tamilstar.com/news/publish/article_3216.shtml

"Mere Paas Maa Hai" versus "Meri Maa Jail Mein Hai" - Mother's Day Special

Mere paas bunglow hai, gaadi hai, tumhare paas kya hai? Maa? Huh, woh to Jail me hai....

Can you handle this sort of Mother's Day Surprise? Its me Sachit Dalal a delhite and an engineer by profession.

When I was less than six months old, my mom used to spend her nights to take care of my nappies and feeding. When I used to try to cry, she used to jump out of her chair. Even before I start feeling hungry she used to offer me feed. When I grew up a bit and started going to school, she used to serve my lunch at my school gate. When I When I was in college, My mother used to cry throughout the nights worrying about me. She has spent most of her nights without any sleep to bring me up.

After completing my degree, I started earning some money amount every month. Mom wanted me to get married and she started looking around for a suitable match for her son.

Eventually I got married

I forgot the meaning of "Mother's day" soon after I got married. Only thing I remember is "women's day" which I was forced to celebrate by paying the party expenses by my wife.

Today many mothers are in Jail due to false Dowry Demand Related Harrasment and Domestic Violence allegations.>

Any mother could be one of them, your mother could be one of them.

I dont know who will succeed (me or my wife), but i have been planning spare my mother from Jail so that i can take care of her to the hospital for her due medical treatments and my wife has been planning hard to get my mother into jail over false dowry harrasment allegations.

Sachit Dalal
My favourite website :
http://mynation.net
Read latest News at : http://mynation.wordpress.com/
Report Dowry Abuse here : http://mynation.net/demand
Report Dowry Law Misuse : http://mynation.net/db
Disclaimer : These are my personal views.Your views could be different.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Unholy_Wedlock/articleshow/2023988.cms

TODAY'S EDITORIAL: Unholy Wedlock

The Centre is considering amending the Dowry Prohibition Act so that the seven-year limit on registering cases under the Act no longer remains in force.

This would effectively mean lifelong extension of the anti-dowry Act. There can be no doubt that the practice of dowry and occurrence of dowry deaths is the most heinous blot on Indian society.

Having said that one needs to ask: Is an amendment to the dowry legislation necessary? Let us first look at the existing anti-dowry provisions.

At present, the Dowry Prohibition Act is applicable if a married woman dies under mysterious circumstances. Under the Act, the accused ? usually the husband and sometimes in-laws ? is presumed guilty unless he can prove his innocence.

The Act is, however, applicable for the first seven years of a couple's married life. If a married woman dies or is harmed under suspicious circumstances after seven years of marriage, Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code kicks in.

Under this section, offenders are liable for imprisonment as well as a fine for an offence deemed to be matrimonial cruelty.

The offence is non-bailable, non-compoundable and cognisable on a complaint made to the police by the victim or her relatives.

These are fairly harsh measures by any standard. Going beyond the present anti-dowry provisions would be draconian, and would undermine the cardinal principle of law: a person is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

Since it came into force, there have been complaints about the misuse of Section 498A. The Malimath committee, set up to reform the criminal justice system, had found fault with Section 498A and recommended making the offence bailable.

However, those in favour of these harsh measures, particularly women's organisations, have argued that there are few cases registered under the anti-dowry provisions and that it is taken recourse to only in extreme circumstances.

If this is true, there is really no need to further tighten the law on dowry. The present proposal to extend anti-dowry provisions for a lifetime also risks making marriage an overtly legalistic affair.

Marriage as an institution is a bedrock of society, and state intrusion into the privacy of couples is unwelcome. There is no doubt that the state must step in if there is a dowry death or harassment.

However, adequate legal provisions for that already exist. These need to be enforced to the best abilities of the police and courts. Further measures will only undermine the law and risk its misuse.

http://www.deccan.com/chennaichronicle/Chennai%20Chronicle/Chennai%20ChronicleDescription.asp#Couple%20granted%20virtual%20divorce

or

http://tinyurl.com/39uub9

Couple granted virtual divorce

If you thought that finding your better half through matrimonial sites was one of the best inventions of technology, then perhaps getting a divorce is not that far.

In what could become a landmark case, a couple sought divorce by mutual consent via video-conferencing and the judgment was sent through email on May 8. The divorced couple (names withheld) was married in 2001 and had settled down in the US. In 2004, the couple decided to go their separate ways after they found married life very cumbersome.

After obtaining legal sanctions the couple moved a legal petition from the US and gave their respective parents the power of attorney to sign any legal documents necessary in India. Both the man and the woman in question are from Chennai and are working in Maryland, USA as software engineers.

In most divorce cases, it is mandatory for both the parties to appear in court.

However, the rules have now been changed for Indian counseling, where the parties need not appear in person.

After listening to this rule, the couple decided to take up this opportunity and settle their divorce the hi-tech way.

The interesting thing about this case is, that it is for the first time that an agreement has been sent via email. However since the agreement was mutual, it was easier for the judgment to be sent through the Internet. Advocate Gagan who was in charge of this case said “This is the first time in the history of family courts that a couple has been divorced without making a single appearance in court. And now the law says that even if the parties have not agreed to separate mutually divorce proceedings can still be carried out through video conference.”

http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=44859

Pakistani Women Against Jailing Husbands (By Aamir Latif)

Monday , 07 May 2007



ISLAMABAD — Pakistani women activists and MPs believe a new bill stipulating jail terms for husbands over verbally, psychologically or sexually abuses of wives would have a devastating impact on the family institution and would send divorce rates sky-high.

"This is a crude bill. I totally object that," Ismat Mehdi, a senior lawyer, told IslamOnline.net.

"This is aimed at ruining the domestic lives of our women."

The Ministry of Law is putting the final touches to a draft legislation called Protection Against Domestic Violence of Women & Children (PADVWC).

The proposed law will allow a woman sexually harassed or otherwise wronged by her husband to approach a protection committee and then the court of law.

The expression "domestic violence", the document says, includes "any willful conduct which: (a) (i) is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman out of the house or to commit suicide or to injure herself; (ii) causes injury or danger to the life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; (b) involves: (i) harassment which causes distress to a woman and includes, (ii) any act which compels the woman to have sexual intercourse against her will either with the husband or any of his relatives or with any other person; (iii) any act which is unbecoming of the dignity of the women; or (iv) any other act of omission of commission which is likely to cause mental torture or mental agony to the woman."

The violator husband would get up to three years of jail.

However, the draft does not provide any relief for husbands being harassed or otherwise wronged by their wives.

PADVWC is seen as the furtherance of the already enacted Women Protection Act (WPA), an amendment of the 1979 Hudood Ordinance on rape and adultery.

It slashed the adultery punishment to imprisonment of up to five years against only male perpetrator.
Under the Hudood code, a man and woman found guilty of having sex outside of marriage could be sentenced to death by stoning or 100 lashes, although that has never been enforced and those convicted of the crime get jail or a fine instead.

Opponents insist that the text does out define sexual harassment.

"My first question to those who have recommended this bill is how would they define the sexual harassment when a husband and a wife are concerned," asked lawyer Mehdi.

Barrister Wajiha, who practices law in UK, says physical abuse and sexual harassment are two different issues.

"There should be and in fact there are laws against physical abuse or torture, but sexual harassment is very difficult to explain," she told IOL.

"It is better to resolve such issues within the family."

Fareeda Ahmed Siddiqui, an MP of the six-party religious alliance, the Muttehida Majlis-e-Amal, sees the bill as being in clear contravention of Shari`ah.

"Husbands and wives are bound to fulfill the sexual desire of each other. What is the question of sexual harassment," she told IOL.

The lawmaker blasted the vague language of the proposed bill.

"One of the clauses of this bill says that a husband could be sent to jail if he verbally, psychologically or sexually abuses her wife. That means, if he even talks to his wife in a loud tone, he could be sent to the jail because the wife can complain that she has been psychologically hurt due to the loud tone," she said.

Siddiqui says that instead of encouraging couples to sort out their problems the proposed legislation encourages outing domestic problems.

"In the Islamic system, differences between husband and wife, no matter how serious they are, are encouraged to be resolved through the intervention of close relatives of the two sides."
She accused foreign-funded NGOs of pressing for the enactment of such alien laws.

Lawyer Mehdi agreed that the Pakistani society is totally different from Western societies and such bills cannot be implemented here.

"No matter in which society you live laws are like clothes to make you fit. If laws are not fit for your society, they create a mess," she warned.

Nasima Sultana, a senior educationist, believes problems should be resolved inside the house.

"Can this law prevent a man from divorcing his wife if she sends him behind the bars? Of course no therefore it is much better to settle down such issues within the family ranks," she told IOL.

"I always advise my girl students not to be impressed by the western type of family system, which is being introduced in our society through different means. That (west) is another world. Our world is totally different. Therefore, we must lice in accordance with our culture and traditions," Sultana maintained.

"We must rather tell the West that we are different from them and are proud of our religious and social values."

Breaking Families

Critics warn that the controversial bill would wreck havoc on the family institution in Pakistan.
"If a wife goes to police or the court against her husband, and he is punished, can you imagine what would be its effect on their married life? asked lawyer Mehdi.

"It will almost be impossible for them to live together if a husband is sent behind the bars.

"Even if a couple is not divorced, they cannot spit out the grudge against each other for the rest of their lives."

Wajiha, the law practitioner, agrees.

"It is not just that a woman goes to the court and the police to lodge a complaint against her husband, and he will be sent to jail immediately.

"She will have to provide proof for sexual harassment before the court. She will have to stand in front of her husband in the court," she said.

"One does not have to be a genius to understand the fate of that couple."

Ms Siddiqui, one of the most senior woman parliamentarians, shares the same concern.

"One cannot imagine how badly this bill will affect our family system. This will shatter the entire family system," she told IOL.

She believes the implementation of the proposed bill would jack up divorce rates in the Asian Muslim country.

"It will increase the divorce ration to a dreadful extent as it will not merely affect the husband-wife life, but its psychological effects will badly affect their children's lives."

Lawyer Mehdi also recognizes that children will bear the brunt in such cases.

"Children will be the worst affected in case of a divorce in the wake of this bill."

Needed

Fauzia Wahab, who sits on an eight-member National Assembly committee on the bill, supports the legislation.

"This is true that it will harm our family system and values, but the family system should not be protected at the cost of women," she told IOL.

"There is a dire need to seek aid of legislation to keep the family united honorably and with dignity and to protect women's interests," she insisted.

Wahab said the new legislation will cover all kind of harassment which causes distress to a woman.
"Legislation may help out eradication of these offences if there is strict enforcement and implementation of laws, but this object can only be achieved if there is awareness among the masses of their rights and obligations."

The committee, which comprises three members from former premier Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan peoples Party (PPP) and five from the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (Q), had sent its recommendations to the Law Ministry for further course of action.

The committee comprises three members from former premier Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan peoples Party (PPP) and five from the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (Q).

Well-placed official sources told IOL that the government had chosen this point of time for this legislation to divert attention from the simmering judicial crisis.

President Prevez Musharraf suspension of the country's top judge, Iftikhar Chaudry, has plunged the south Asian country into a judicial and constitutional crisis and several judges have since resigned their posts in protest.

Many believe Chaudry is being punished for refusing to toe the official line on several issues, including the controversial file of missing Pakistanis, as well as his opposition to the planned re-election of Musharraf later this year.

May 7, 2007

Islam Online

Virginity regained in Mumbai

Women have found surgical methods to dupe men looking for chastity. Chastity is NO longer guaranteed !!

While the physical scars of pre marital sex may be "operated upon", what about the mental bonding with the ex boyfriend and resultant conflict with the legally married husband ?

Are we paving way for more divorces and marital discord, along with false Domestic Violence (DV ) cases ?? !!

Mera Bharath Mahaan



Virginity regained in Mumbai

Sunday, May 06, 2007 11:10 IST

Women in Mumbai are reconstructing their hymens in the hope it will help reconstruct their lives after pre-marital sex. Geetanjali Jhala reports.

Not long ago 25-year-old Ritu Patel felt depressed. She had returned from London after breaking up with her boyfriend Zeeshan Khan who had decided to go along with his parents’ wish to marry within his community.

She and Zeeshan had had sex during the three years they had been together. How would her prospective husband now react when he discovered she wasn't a virgin? And yet today she looks forward to marriage. Her confidence arose from a visit to a plastic surgeon who reconstructed her hymen.

It’s a 30-minute surgical procedure called hymenoplasty costing Rs 15,000 to 25,000 which has found many takers in Mumbai. A membrane is created about an inch into the vagina, using the flap of the vaginal lining. It heals fast, although patients are advised to refrain from activities like cycling for a few weeks. It leaves no scars. "Even so, I advise women not to go in for unnecessary surgery. After counselling, some of them change their minds," says gynaecologist Indira Hinduja.

But for many others, the social pressure to be a virgin bride is overwhelming, and the easy restoration of virginity irresistible.

"Hymenoplasty has been refined in the last few years. As awareness spreads, more women are coming forward to ask for the procedure," said Milind Wagh, plastic surgeon at Hiranandani Hospital, who does two hymenoplasties a month. He says women going for arranged marriages are sometimes accompanied by their mothers or aunts.

Sex before marriage is becoming commonplace in the city with more women getting financially independent and easier mingling of the sexes at work, gyms and parties. And yet the social expectation to be a virgin at the time of marriage remains undiminished, which fuels the trend for hymenoplasty. Even older women are going for it. "Women in their 30s have come to me for ‘revirgination’," said Mohan Thomas, a cosmetic surgeon.

Conflicting emotions follow the operation. Ritu Patel feels relieved that hymenoplasty has covered up her sexually active past. But she has pangs of guilt too. "I feel I'll be hoodwinking the man I marry," she said.

(Names of patients have been changed on request.)

Original Article at :
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1095026

Blurred line between 'gift' & dowry

Blurred line between 'gift' & dowry
[7 May, 2007 l 0105 hrs ISTlTIMES NEWS NETWORK]

NEW DELHI: Cases of girls getting space in boardrooms are not rare anymore. In fact, they have outsmarted boys in areas once thought to be men's stronghold. One would easily imagine then that girls are no longer a parent's burden when it comes to their marriage.

Comment : Yes women have earned authority ... but are they ready for equal responsibility ??

But, perhaps surprisingly, getting a daughter married is still a nightmare for many parents in India. Whatever the financial condition of the family, everyone wishes to accomplish their dream of marrying off their daughter in style.

Comment : Surprise surprise.... this very intelligent article some how forgets men's plight and focuses ONLY on the young girls !!

The customary gifts exchanged — or rather given by the girl's family —ensures that most girls when they leave home for their husband's house are accompanied by suitcases overflowing with clothes, jewellery and, depending on the status of the girl's father, a vehicle.

Comment : Most girls.... suitcases overflowing ... oopss..

Comment : Girls wish to marry upward. So they look for the prize catch. i.e. the best earning man. There are 100s and 1000s of poor men who find no bride. But the rich women wish to get richer and so they barter a few closes for A FEW CRORES the rich groom would have... why else would these women pay ??

In fact, few parents complain about the "giving" per se even though giving dowry is also an offence. And trouble arises when demands go beyond what they one can afford.

Comment : What about the trouble of false 498A cases ?

Nobody is quite sure how the dowry system started, but most agree that it was formulated to protect the girl financially in a society where the boy stood to inherit all property as a provision of stridhan. Another theory that floats is that the father, to take equal responsibility of the girl, would share a girl's expenses with her husband. The practice has obviously undergone numerous changes over the years.

Comment : Including the false 498A littered around. Just search on google using "false 498A" as the search string. You would be amazed at the number of false 498A or false dowry cases that abound

The irony of the legal provision that states both giving and taking dowry are equally serious offences is that the only people who can complain about giving dowry are the very people who demand it. Said advocate Mukta Gupta: "It's a catch-22 situation for us. Giving dowry is an offence under the Dowry Prohibition Act but who is to come forward with the complaint?"

Comment : Though the law says that both giving and taking dowry are offense LET THIS AUTHOR SHOW ME ONE, JUST ONE case where the giver has been punished. I'll show 100s if NOT 1000s of cases where the husbands who are alleged to have taken dowry are made to bear the cross

Nisha Sharma, who shot to fame in 2003 after she refused to marry Munish Dalal on the day of their marriage due to dowry harassment, said it is important to be clear on such issues rather than suffering later. "It was not an easy decision for me but if I had married him that day, my life could have been hell," she said.

"My daughter was waiting to enter the pandal when her in-laws asked for a car and Rs 12.5 lakh. This was sheer blackmailing. My daughter took a stand then, but most parents would have bowed down to the pressure," said D D Sharma, Nisha's father.

And there lies the catch. In several cases, parents are only too happy to comply with demands till they overshoot the amount originally decided. In the case of Mukta Chandolia, who was pushed down from the fifth floor off her house by her fiance, the fight started when her family was asked to give Rs 5 lakh more, besides the sum already agreed upon. "Dowry is an integral part of our system. I personally bought furniture for Deepak, Mukta's fiance, but the trouble started when he got too greedy," said Mukta's brother Manish. Obviously, there is something intrinsically wrong with our idea of marriage. Parents who praise their samdhis for not asking for dowry, — almost as if it is a favour being done — would on the other hand lavish them with clothes, gold, furniture, holiday packages and the works.

Comment : What about the 1000s of cases just in this one yahoo group where elderly parents and innocents have been wrongly charged. What about the 100s of cases in this ONE single blog.

What about sad tales in other blogs all over the net like these
http://divorceindia.blogspot.com/
http://whileonthisissue.blogspot.com/
http://bareact.blogspot.com/
http://merabarath.blogspot.com/
http://my2cw.blogspot.com/
http://batteredmale.blogspot.com/
http://www.blurty.com/users/vinayak
http://o3.indiatimes.com/mEra


"This is not dowry. When my daughter gets married, I would like to give her gifts. This is the dream of each parent.

And when I give gifts to my daughter, how can I not give something to her husband who is now like my son? This is the done thing in society and we have to live by its laws," says Vibha Arya (name changed).

"There is nothing wrong with giving gifts to young people who are setting up homes," says author Urvashi Butalia. "The problem is with the way the woman becomes the vehicle for the boy's family to acquire material goods and money," she adds.

Comment :
- What about young women making men their vehicle to riches ?
- What about women regularly seeking better earning, wealthier men ??
- Why does this society easily accept a woman pestering the man for jewels, a house in her name, pestering him for costly sarees, and what not ?
- From gold to diamonds, to silk sarees, to cosmetics, the costliest are made for women
- How does that fit in to the moral high ground of this writer and others on this issue ?

Parents are also caught off guard when demands come in at the last minute. Some parents are asked to cough up impossible amounts before the wedding ceremony can commence. "The education system seems to be a complete failure in this regard. How much you get in the wedding and how much you give is taken as an indication of your social status," says counsellor Sabhyata Arora.

Comment :
- What about the boy's parents who are caught off guard ?
- what about the 1000s of senior citizen who are lingering on old age homes ?
- they are there MAINLY because the daughter in law threw them out ...ain't it ??? why is there no cry about the aged Indian who sacrificed everything for his son, now in penury, living all by him / herself brought out by essays like this ?

Dear....oh dear....oh dear..... when will this misandry stop ??



Original article at
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Delhi/Blurred_line_between_gift__dowry/articleshow/2009266.cms

Its official. Women indulge in domestic violence as much as men do !!

Excerpts from : Marc E. Angelucci's Letter:
Domestic violence article ignored male victims

Published on Friday, May 4, 2007

[...........]

A recent 32-nation study by the University of New Hampshire found women initiate partner violence as often as men and that controlling behavior is found equally in the perpetrators of both sexes. http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID41E2.pdf

In fact, virtually all sociological research shows women initiate domestic violence as often as men, that women use weapons more than men, and that 38% of injured victims are men, as this California State University bibliography shows. Many male victims are disabled or elderly. May refuse to hit back or are afraid of arrest or losing child custody if they do. Many just "take it" while their children continue to be damaged by the exposure to the violence.

We cannot break this intergenerational cycle by ignoring half of it. That is why a global coalition of peer-reviewed domestic violence experts recently formed to support a research-based, inclusive approach to domestic violence and their website has solid data showing women initiate the violence as often as men.


Marc E. Angelucci
President
Los Angeles chapter
National Coalition of Free Men

Marc E. Angelucci's letter can be found at http://www.caribbeannetnews.com/news-1308--7-7--.html

All Men are being treated as animals, rapists and cheats.

They have to prove themselves to be innocent

There are 1000s of women cheaten men on false promises of sex, there are women cheating men after a sex etc etc... these women do NOT get punished ..

However should a man cheat on his lover he is hauled up for rape and that too at the apex court in India

How sad ??


News Item ; SC expanded definition but created scope for abuse

TOI- Kolkotta Page 10

SC expanded definition but created scope for abuse

Manoj Mitta | TNN

New Delhi: The dramatic arrest of a bride-groom in Delhi this week on a rape charge made by his previous lover highlights a legal gray area that has emerged in the last four years, thanks to a string of controversial judgments delivered by the Supreme Court.

The law itself ? that is, Section 375 IPC, defining rape ? does not deal with consent for sex obtained on a "false promise" or consent given "under misconception of fact". But there have been at least three SC verdicts holding that if a woman has sex with a man on the basis of his false promise to marry, he is liable to be convicted for rape.

The first time SC widened the definition of rape was in 2003 in Uday vs State of Karnataka, where it expanded the definition to include a situation in which the woman consents to having sex under a misconception of fact that the man intends to marry her at some stage. This opened up the possibility for the police to register a rape case under Section 376 IPC even when the woman admits to engaging in consensual sex.

The apex court reiterated this approach in another rape case in 2004, Dileep Singh vs State of Bihar, where it examined evidence in detail to ascertain whether the accused had ``with the fraudulent intention of inducing the woman to sexual intercourse, made a false promise to marry". The SC again acquitted the accused as it found that the evidence did not warrant "an inference beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had no intention to marry her at all from the inception...''

The principles enunciated by these two verdicts paved the way last year for the first ever rape conviction by SC on the ground of false promise to marry. In Yedla Srinivasa Rao vs State of Andhra Pradesh, a bench comprising Justices A K Mathur and Altamas Kabir convicted the accused for rape on the basis of evidence showing that he persuaded the woman to have sexual intercourse with the promise to marry and when she become pregnant, he fled the village.


URL
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Delhi/SC_expanded_definition_but_created_scope_for_abuse/articleshow/1994469.cms

PMO official accused of domestic violence by wife

PTI

Saturday, May 05, 2007 16:00 IST

NEW DELHI: Nearly 13 years after tying the nuptial knot, the wife of an IAS officer has filed a criminal complaint in a court here alleging she has been thrown out of their house as her parents were unable to meet her in-laws' recurrent dowry demands.

The complaint of one Shivani Kabra, filed under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, alleged that her husband Shaleen Kabra, a Jammu and Kashmir cadre IAS officer at present posted as director in the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), refused her the entry into their house on the evening of April 10.

Through a complaint filed before Metropolitan Magistrate Sanjay Bansal, she also sought the custody of their two children alleging that she was not being allowed to visit them.

Granting the temporary custody of two minor sons to her, the court listed the matter for July 2 and asked the IAS officer and his parents to file their reply.

She has also named her father-in-law Ram Parsan, mother-in-law Leelawati and sister-in-law Lata Soni as accused in the case.

Within a month after their marriage in February 1994, her in-laws started torturing her to bring more dowry although they had incurred expenses of Rs40 lakh, most of which was in the form of cash and jewellery given to her in-laws, she alleged.

In 2002, Shaleen was transferred to the PMO and shifted to Delhi. That's when they allegedly started demanding a car.

Shivani opposed this demand saying that cash for the same already been given to them at the time of marriage, the complaint alleged.

Later, they also started forcing her to ask her parents to purchase a house in Delhi in Shaleen's name.

She has sought relief of restraint on her in-laws from inflicting violence on her, letting her live in the shared house and restraint on them from entering her portion of the shared house or secure an alternate accomodation for her and pay rent for the same.

Shivani has also sought a total of Rs50 lakh as return of her dowry, compensation for loss of earning, mental and physical torture.

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1094926

British Law is often used as precedent In Indian Law

So… is this Judgement of any use in India, while deciding alimony cases ?

Husbands not expected to compensate ex-wives for future earnings

LONDON, April 14 A British judge has ruled ex-husbands can not be expected to compensate their ex-wives for future earnings.

The judge ruled in England, which is known for favoring women in divorce proceedings, that a baker identified as Mr. H does not have to give Mrs. H a share of his future earnings after their divorce, The Times of London reported Saturday.

Mrs. H, who was awarded nearly $26 million in cash and assets in the divorce, argued she should also be entitled to a share of her ex-husband’s future profits after their marriage fell apart due to his infidelity. She gave up her career as a teacher after their marriage to raise the couple’s children.

“This is not a case in which the wife gave up a career that was likely to provide substantial income or monetary reward,” the judge said. “She was a teacher.” The judge said Mrs. H’s contribution to her husband’s status as a high earner was small.

“His high level of income is primarily based on his talents, hard work and good fortune in pursuing his career,” he said.

Copyright 2007 by UPI

http://www.market-day.net/article_66991/20070414/British-judge-strikes-blow-to-alimony.php

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/business/news/article_1291367.php/

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/51842.html

Why are men bothered about alimony ?

Notes : If this feminist is to be believed women do NOT get alimony easily. So why are men bothered about alimony ? is it the case of men being TOO honest ??


http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070416/asp/jamshedpur/story_7652921.asp

Law leaves women in ‘lurch’

OUR CORRESPONDENT

Ranchi, April 15: When Malancha Ghosh of Mahila Utpidan Virodhi Evam Vikas Samiti, was invited to speak at the workshop held under the aegis of Jharkhand Judicial Academy, little did the organisers imagine that she would stir up a hornet’s nest.

In fact, Ghosh’s speech became so “unpleasant” for the members of the judiciary and police force, who were present at the workshop, that she was asked to cut her piece short and step down.

The workshop was a daylong affair that dealt with issues such as bigamy, divorce, alimony and custody battles and other women and family-related issues. And Ghosh spared none — not the judiciary nor the law enforcers — as she pointed out loopholes and fallacies in various cases, which never really gave the promised “justice” to the women. Also, she accused the courts and police as insensitive to women’s issues.

To make her point Ghosh narrated several incidents. She spoke of a certain case where her husband threw out a mother along with her two children. Later, when her son turned 10, the husband claimed and won the custody of the son. Afterwards, when she sought the help of the high court and Supreme Court, she was finally granted an alimony of Rs 18,000 plus Rs 3 lakh as compensation. Three years have passed since then and the woman, Ghosh pointed out, is yet to receive a penny from that amount.

Ghosh also referred to the Paharia rape case, which has been awaiting justice in the Patna High Court for the past 18 years. “A futile wait,” she added.

Malancha Ghosh also spoke of several instances where police stations have been used to solemnise and legalise second marriages, instance when a court granted a woman a meagre alimony when she sought the right to remain with her husband. And when a court sought a TI parade when medical tests prove d a case of rape. “Why was there a need for a TI parade?” wondered Ghosh, “When medical reports had confirmed rape and police did admit to raiding the village?” she asked while talking about the gang rape cases at Paharia.

Ghosh has been upsetting status quo for long at Ranchi. And she succeeded in rattling the normally unflappable judges present at the workshop. But, she had made her point. Women in this country are being denied the basic right to life, let alone life with dignity. Case in point, the paradox of an increasing population and a declining sex ratio.

COURT REMARK COMES AS BUSINESSMAN BHARAT HEGDE CHALLENGES ALIMONY ORDER SAYING HE HAS ‘NO SOURCE OF INCOME’

Tax avoidance makes it tough to compute alimony: HC

Krishnadas Rajagopal

New Delhi, May 1:

A DELHI High Court Bench has found it difficult to compute the alimony to be paid by Bharat Hegde, son of the late politician Ramakrishna Hegde, to his estranged wife Saroj because Hegde, like many other self-employed people, has not fully disclosed his income.

The court said he did not disclose the full income for fear of having to pay income tax.

Hegde is believed to have interests in property and businesses worth Rs 28.5 crore.

“Unfortunately, in India, parties do not truthfully reveal their income. For self-employed persons or persons employed in the unorganised sector, truthful income never surfaces and tax avoidance is the norm,” Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, who was hearing the case, observed.

The Bench was hearing a two-year-old petition filed by Bharat challenging a court order passed on May 13, 2004 directing him to pay Rs 25,000 per month as interim maintenance to his unemployed wife, who had sought divorce on grounds of desertion and cruelty.

The family court passed the order for extending financial support to Saroj after she said “her husband was the son of Shri Ramakrishna Hegde, ex-Chief Minister of Karnataka and an industrialist operating a unit at Peeneya Industrial Estate, Stage-II, Bangalore from where he was earning at least Rs 10 lakh per month”.

Hegde contested the order in the High Court saying he was “unemployed with no source of income and totally dependent on his parents” even as his wife listed more than a dozen prime assets that he owned, mostly in Delhi, Bangalore and Mumbai.

Terming the present case as an instance of how “self-employed persons seldom disclose their true income”, the court observed that in such instances judges are forced to bank on their “prudence and wisdom” to work out the likely income of the spouse from the primary data that is made available.

Upholding the May 2004 order for payment of Rs 25,000 as monthly interim maintenance to Saroj until the final conclusion of the divorce proceedings, the Bench considered it “irrelevant” that she had sought to opt out of the marriage owing to her husband’s alleged cruelty and desertion.

“While judging the issue of interim maintenance, conduct or misconduct of either spouse is irrelevant for the reason in every proceedings of divorce, dissolution or judicial separation there is bound to be some allegations or other pertaining to matrimonial misconduct,” the court said.


It further held that the focus of inquiry should solely pertain to the financial means of either spouse. The court took “means” to include status of parties, reasonable wants of the spouse claiming financial support and the income and property of the other party and family members.

“If conduct or misconduct were to be alone considered, no spouse would get interim maintenance,” Justice Nandrajog added.

Females Will Never Lie about being Raped Down Under Either?

Via: The Honor Network

Females Will Never Lie about being Raped Down Under Either?
Priority News Exchange Program News Item (PNEP)

Same story from another part of the world:

A 17-year-old former Perth Catholic schoolboy is free after nearly a year in prison awaiting trial on rape charges of which he was acquitted after it emerged that his accuser had lied about her sex life.

Perth Now reports that Patrick Waring, then a 15-year-old Catholic college student, was dragged out of bed by police a year ago and refused bail on the say-so of his 17-year-old accuser.

However, just before the trial started, the girl admitted lying about her sex life the whole time, Perth Now says.

She had insisted she was a virgin.

DNA tests excluded Waring from her claims of rape.

Waring's accuser finally admitted she had had sex with a man at the back of a cinema the same afternoon, two hours before claiming Waring raped her at Joondalup's Central Park after following her from the railway station on 30 March last year.

She also admitted to having been in a sexual relationship with her boyfriend at the time.

The girl's new story included being raped by two different men in two hours.

She said the cinema sex with a 20-year-old, who she had met on the internet, was rape, but she didn't want him charged because it might affect her compensation claim.

The girl had previously lied to interviewing officers, the Sexual Assault Resource Centre doctor who examined her and to prosecutor Amanda Forrester.

Waring was originally denied bail when a police officer told the Children's Court that Waring had phoned the girl and threatened her - a fact the police later admitted was wrong.

Patrick's father, Terry Waring, said his family had been torn apart for a year. His and his wife's belief in the justice system had been shattered."Shoddy work, cruelty and seeming vindictiveness cost us our house, financial security and a lifetime of savings for a three-week trial," he said.

"The emotional cost to the family has been incalculable. Personally, I have not cried as much since my brother was killed in Vietnam.""It's the finish of school for Patrick," Mr Waring said.

"He's lost virtually all of Year 11 and the start of Year 12 and he's had to grow up very fast. He lost his youth in there."We didn't tell anyone at school what had happened to him. He just disappeared. And now we couldn't send him back there to face the ramifications of this."

Patrick's 24-year-old brother, Michael, also lost a year of study for his degree in computer science and information systems because of the ordeal.

http://clericalwhispers.blogspot.com/2007/04/wrongly-accused-boy-released-australia.htm

'Let there be rhyme & reason in dowry arrests’

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1094148

`Let there be rhyme & reason in dowry arrests'
Anshika Mishra
Wednesday, May 02, 2007 11:26 IST

A 52-year-old man, accused of allegedly harassing his daughter-in-law for dowry, has moved Bombay High Court, asking it to lay down guidelines for arresting an accused in cases pertaining to family disputes.

Baban Dhus, a municipal school teacher, was arrested by the police, along with his wife, son Nivrutti and two others, in December 2006 following a complaint lodged by daughter-in-law Vaishali, alleging harassment over a demand for Rs 10 lakh.

Denying the charge, Dhus and family members alleged that Vasihali's father, a police constable, misused his powers and got them arrested even before a preliminary inquiry was conducted.

The petition stated that the urgency with which five members of the Dhus family were arrested as soon as the complaint was filed, belied the conventional procedure to first counsel the family members. The arrest and the subsequent humiliation faced by Dhus and his wife, when they were allegedly handcuffed and made to walk through their chawl in Sewree to recover the `streedhan', have shattered all hopes of reconciliation between the young couple.

Vaishali and Nivrutti were married in May 2006. While Vaishali stated in her complaint that she was mentally and physically harassed for dowry, the Dhus family accused her of quarrelling often about setting up a separate home with her husband.

When the two families met on December 3 to try and settle the dispute, Vaishali's father, Sawkar Padwal, was accompanied by four other constables in plainclothes. Her uncle, a police inspector at Kalachowkie police station, too was present. When the talks yielded no results, Dhus and his family were taken to Kalachowkie police station, and were arrested after a complaint was registered at 6 pm. They were released on bail on December 5.

Following the arrest, Nivrutti lost his job as a medical representative. Alleging that Vaishaili's father was using his power to put pressure on the BMC to terminate his services, Baban Dhus sought protection from the HC.

"While the police must investigate every complaint of dowry harassment, some protection must be granted to families in cases of false complaints," Dhus's lawyer Shrikant Bhatt said when the case was heard on Monday.