Sunday, December 26, 2010

Policemen in dock for implicating four in false robbery case

Policemen in dock for implicating four in false robbery case

New Delhi, Dec 26 (PTI) A Delhi court has filed a complaint against four police personnel, including an inspector, and others for implicating four men in a false robbery case saying it involved serious constitutional and human rights violations.
Additional Sessions Judge Kamini Lau also issued notice to the Delhi government seeking its response as to why compensation should not be provided to the four men who were acquitted in the case.
The court also expressed its concern over the manner in which police officers acted to implicate the accused.
"Serious constitutional and human right violations have been observed by this court in the present case. None of the accused before this court who all come from very poor families, have any previous criminal record. They have suffered detention and trial for an offence they have never committed," the court said.
It acquitted Dalip Kumar, Deepak, Ravinder and Vikas, who were accused of robbing Nitin, the complainant, of his wallet and a mobile phone at knife point on January nine this year at Jahangirpuri here.
The court expressed surprise after Nitin deposed before it during the trial that no incident of robbery had taken place.
He testified that he went to the police station on instruction of his employer- property dealers Kuldeep Soni, Deepak Soni and Vishwajeet-- where constable Sajjan Singh, head constable Dalip, assistant sub inspector Umed Singh and inspector SB Yadav allegedly made him sign some blank sheets.
The complainant also did not identify any of the accusedduring the trial.
The court, which directed an inquiry into the matter by Delhi police''s Crime Branch, was shocked after being told that Nitin was complainant in another FIR bearing No 205/10 dated June 16, 2010 with the same sort of allegations.
Likewise, the court was further told that Kuldeep, Deepak and Vishwajeet were also complainants in different FIRs with similar sort of charges with Jahangirpuri police station.
"It is not the duty of the government to lodge false cases in order to book the suspected criminals. I may say that the officers of the State (Police) have failed to act in accordance with law and to perform the duties assigned to them.
"Initiating and instituting false criminal proceedings knowing that there is no just or lawful ground for the same is a serious offence. Registration of false cases against suspects is an impermissible method of crime control," the Judge said. .

Tuesday, December 21, 2010 Delhi Seminar of 11dec10 coverage-p7 news channel 20 dec 10 Delhi Seminar of 11dec10 coverage -p7 news channel 20 dec 10

Part 1/2



Part 2/2

(There is NO SOUND at 8.15min to 9.40min timeline duration in the telecasted programme )


Monday, December 20, 2010

Court puts woman, her kin on trial for falsely implicating 3 cops|Only a woman judge can pass such order that woman do lie,perjure,mislead and utter falsehood

A Delhi court has ordered prosecution of a woman, her husband and father-in-law for falsely charging three Haryana policemen with raping her at a police station six years ago.

ASJ Kamini Lau ordered criminal trial of the three Jahangirpuri residents, while absolving a police sub-inspector and two constables of the charges of abduction and rape of the woman. "A complaint under Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is being lodged under appropriate provisions of law against the girl, her husband and her father-in-law for the commission of offence of instituting criminal proceedings against the cops who were falsely charged," Lau said while acquitting the officials.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

498a seminar meet on 11th December 2010 covered by p7 news channel

p7 news channel programme covering the 498a seminar held in Delhi on 11th Deccember 2010.

The programme was interrupted due to direct telecast of Smt Sonia Gandhi’s speech of Congress Plenary meet at Burari Delhi.

Expect that it to would be retelecasted. This part has coverage of seminar along with bytes of Manoj singhal,Sanjay Mehra,Abhimanyu, Rishi Ahuja and Manish Mittal along with bytes of parents

The below is the approx minutes of the programme that was aired

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Supreme Court admits it erred, upholds commutation of death penalty

Supreme Court admits it erred, upholds commutation of death penalty

Supreme Court: a frank admission

New Delhi: In a rare instance, the Supreme Court has admitted that its earlier judgments, in one and the same case, upholding the death sentence awarded by the trial court and confirmed by the High Court were a mistake and violation of human rights of the accused. The court in a second review upheld the Assam Governor's order commuting the punishment to life sentence.

A Bench of Justices Aftab Alam and A.K. Ganguly in a recent order said: “Instances of this court's judgment violating the human rights of the citizens may be extremely rare but it cannot be said that such a situation can never happen. On a review of the reasoning in the petition, we find that the finding in the judgment is vitiated by errors apparent on the face of the record.”

Inalienable right

Writing the judgment, Justice Ganguly said: “Human rights are the basic, inherent, immutable and inalienable rights to which a person is entitled simply by virtue of his being born a human. They are such rights which are to be made available as a matter of right. The Constitution and legislation of a civilised country recognise them since they are so quintessentially part of every human being. That is why every democratic country committed to Rule of Law put into force mechanisms for their enforcement and protection.”

In the instant case, the Assam trial court held Ram Deo Chauhan alias Raj Nath Chauha guilty of murdering four members of a family in March 1992 and slapped the death penalty on him. This was confirmed by the Gauhati High Court and later by the Supreme Court in July 2000.

Review petition

In a review petition, the convict took the stand that he was a minor aged 16 at the time of the offence and the hence the death penalty could not have been awarded by the courts below.

A three-judge Bench by a majority of 2:1 rejected the review petition and again confirmed the death sentence. But Justice K.T. Thomas, in his minority judgment, felt that since there was a doubt whether Ram Deo was a minor or not when the offence was committed, it would be in the interest of justice to commute death to life imprisonment.

Later, acting on a an article written by Ved Kumari, Professor of the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, the National Human Rights Commission headed by the former Chief Justice of India J.S. Verma felt that Justice Thomas' reasoning was the correct approach and recommended that the death sentence be commuted and the Governor accordingly did so.

However, on a writ petition, the Governor's order was set aside by the Supreme Court in 2009 holding that the NHRC had no jurisdiction to intervene in the matter.

Governor's order restored

Allowing the review petition against this order, the Bench said: “On a very careful consideration of this issue, this court thinks that in view of various questions of far-reaching importance having been raised in this second review, it may be a travesty of justice if this petition is dismissed. If a person has been guaranteed certain rights either under the Constitution or under an international covenant or under a law, and he is denied access to such a right, then it amounts to a clear violation of his human right and NHRC has the jurisdiction to intervene for protecting it. We are of the opinion that in doing so, NHRC acted within its jurisdiction.”

The Bench restored the Governor's order of commutation of the death sentence.

Eminent people dare SC to book them for contempt too

Eminent people dare SC to book them for contempt too

NEW DELHI: Twenty-five citizens, including eminent persons, on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court daring it to initiate contempt proceedings against them as they were expressing solidarity with advocates Prashant and Shanti Bhushan, who had alleged that eight of the 16 former Chief Justices of India (CJIs) were corrupt.

The applicants included RTI activist Arvind Kejriwal, social activist Aruna Roy, National Advisory Council (NAC) member Harsh Mander, former IIM Ahmedabad director-in-charge Prof Jagdeep S Chhokar, Magsaysay Award winner Rajendra Singh, former IFS officer and social activist Madhu Bhaduri, JNU's professor emeritus Amit Bhaduri, former West Bengal additional chief secretary Kalyani Chaudhuri and social activist Madhu Kishwar.

Others included professionals ranging from engineers, journalists, RTI activists, a major general and an educationist. Appearing for them, senior advocate Vikas Singh requested a Bench comprising Justices Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph and H L Dattu that they be made parties in the contempt proceedings drawn against Prashant Bhushan for his views about corruption in judiciary published in a weekly magazine last year. With so many eminent persons seeking to be respondents in the case, the bench refused to take up the application.

पत्नी ने किया जज को जलाने का प्रयास

पत्नी ने किया जज को जलाने का प्रयास

रायपुर। छत्तीसगढ़ के कोरबा में एक जज को उनकी पत्नी ने पेट्रोल छिड़ककर जिंदा जलाने का प्रयास किया। जज की शिकायत पर पुलिस ने आरोपी पत्नी को गिरफ्तार कर लिया। मंगलवार को मुख्य न्यायिक मजिस्ट्रेट के समक्ष आरोपी को पेश किया गया, जहां से उसे न्यायिक हिरासत में भेज दिया गया। बताया गया है कि कुछ समय से दोनों के संबंध ठीक नहीं चल रहे थे।

स्थानीय अदालत में न्यायिक दंडाधिकारी द्वितीय श्रेणी केपी सिंह भदौरिया ने पुलिस को बताया कि मंगलवार सुबह घर में उनकी पत्नी मन्नू ने उन [जज] पर पेट्रोल छिड़क दिया और माचिस लेकर उनकी ओर दौड़ीं। जज ने भागकर अपनी जान बचाई। कोरबा के पुलिस अधीक्षक रतन लाल डांगी ने बताया कि जज की शिकायत पर मुकदमा दर्ज कर मन्नू को गिरफ्तार कर लिया गया।

मन्नू ने बताया कि वह अपने पति से परेशान थी। उसने करीब आठ साल पहले अपने पति के खिलाफ दहेज प्रताड़ना का मामला दर्ज कराया था, लेकिन बाद में उनके बीच सुलह हो गई थी।

Put all new FIRs online: Delhi HC

Put all new FIRs online: Delhi HC

7th Dec 2010

NEW DELHI: In a major move towards transparency in police functioning, the high court has directed the Delhi Police to start uploading all First Information Reports (FIRs) registered in the city onto its website within 24 hours of filing. The police are required to implement the order from February 1, 2011.

The landmark order, passed by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Manmohan, said it's the duty of the police to provide information and the accused does not need to move court to get a copy of an FIR.

"Fair and impartial investigation is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution and presumption as regards the innocence of an accused is a right. Therefore, a person booked under criminal law has a right to know the nature of allegations so that he can take necessary steps to safeguard his liberty," the bench said.

Earlier, additional solicitor general A S Chandiok and amicus curie Arvind Nigam submitted their suggestions on the matter.
The counsel had said that recording of an FIR was an official act of a public official in discharge of his or her official duties and, therefore, it was a public document within the meaning of Section 74 of the Evidence Act, 1872.

The court said an accused was entitled to get a copy of the FIR earlier than what's prescribed under Section 207 of the Criminal Procedure Code (which says the FIR would be supplied through a magistrate's order after the accused moves court).

Monday, December 6, 2010

New-age couples take MoU path to break free

New-age couples take MoU path to break free

HYDERABAD: In a curious trend unfolding at the city family courts, new-age couples are citing seemingly contradictory clauses in their divorce petitions to break free from their unsuccessful marriages. This, say advocates, is increasingly being based on a memorandum of understanding (MoU) signed between the estranged spouses a few days before they approach the family court seeking legal intervention to end their marriage. "The MoUs are entered into with the sole purpose to catalysing a fast divorce," said a lawyer.

Often times under the MoU, the spouse filing the divorce petition is given a free hand to take refuge under any clause which will help the court declare their marriage as null and void. At the same time, the other partner chooses to remain unavailable for court proceedings thereby ensuring that a legal end to their marriage is pronounced at the earliest.

"By failing to turn up at the court for hearings, the other party shows his or her unwillingness to mend their marriage following which the court usually grants a legal separation without much delay," says P Sundaraiah, senior advocate at Hyderabad family court. A recent petition filed at this court had cited non-consummation of marriage and impotency of the partner as the grounds to declare the marriage null and void under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

"For a person to know the potency status of his or her partner, the marriage needs to be consummated first. But this seldom happens and the petitioners level two blatantly contradictory charges on their estranged spouse," says advocate Anita Jain of Secunderabad family court. While those filing it in agreement with their partners seldom face a problem, in many contested divorce cases, such contradictory charges have earned the petitioner a defamation suit. In one recent case, the husband of a woman seeking divorce on the ground of his impotency, filed a defamation case based on the medical report (which he came armed with to the court). Needless to say, the medical report dismissed charges of impotency levelled against him by his wife.
Reacting to such petitions, the courts often call for an independent medical test to verify the authenticity of the partner's claim. But on grounds of it being a sensitive matter, people often refuse to undergo the test, say advocates.
A section of the lawyers, however, reason in favour of pressing such charges in one petition in genuine cases. "Clubbing these two clauses together goes on to make the case stronger. Behavioural patterns are often an indication of the impotency of spouses, and claiming a marriage dissolution on grounds of non-consummation stand perfectly justified in such cases," says Nischala Siddha Reddy, advocate at Secunderabad family court.

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Justice Dhingra aquits Mother in law of dowry death, slamming the trial court and public prosecutor for callousness. 'Criminal Justice System in India Needs Overhauling'

Justice Dhingra aquits Mother in law of dowry death, slamming the trial court and  public prosecutor for callousness. 'Criminal Justice System in India Needs Overhauling'

The Delhi High Court has said the justice delivery system needs overhauling as the poor are not getting timely justice in higher courts which are are kept occupied with cases involving persons with money or power.

"The whole criminal justice system needs overhauling so that the constitutional mandate of equality before law is made meaningful and it should not be the case that higher courts are kept occupied by the persons with money or power, as is the case today," the court said.

The court made the remarks while setting aside the conviction of a poor vegetable vendor who had to spend seven years in jail due to delay in disposing his appeal in the High Court.

The trial court had awarded seven years jail term to the vendor for allegedly killing his wife in 2003 and he filed an appeal in 2004 on which the High Court took six years to pass the verdict.

In the verdict, Justice S N Dhingra found him innocent and acquitted him but he had already spent his jail term.
"In this case, the High Court did not find time to hear the appeals of other two appellants who continued to remain in jail during trial period as well as appeal period for no crime of theirs," the court said adding the High Court should fix a time limit for disposing of such appeals.

"Neither the criminal should be let off by default as the High Court has no time to hear appeals nor should the innocents rot in jail by default," the court said.

The High Court pulled up the trial court for convicting the accused even though there were not sufficient evidence against him and merely on the basis of a statement made by his brother-in-laws.

"The conviction seems to be the result of a callous criminal justice system where neither the defence counsel prepared the case nor the prosecutor discharged his duty in an impartial manner nor did the judge consider it as his duty to see what offence was made out and everyone acted in a mechanical manner," the court said.

The court found that there was no evidence that the accused was harassing his wife for dowry leading to her death."The most disturbing factor is that no evidence, whatsoever, was collected by the police about the real facts. No effort was made by the public prosecutor or by the trial judge to even go through the evidence and consider what charges were made out. Charges seemed to have been framed in a mechanical manner," the court said.

In this case, the accused had married Janki in December, 2000 and she died within five months of her marriage.The court said that in such cases husband and in-laws should come forward to tell what was the real cause of death.

"The criminal practice in India has been on the lines of old track that accused must not speak and he should not be examined as a witness. I do not know why this practice developed but in all matrimonial offences, this practice is shutting the doors of the court to the version of the other side by their advocates," the court said.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

Woman, paramour her brother booked for pushing husband to attempt suicide

Woman, paramour her brother booked for pushing husband to attempt suicide

December 02 2010

Gandhigram police in Rajkot city have booked a woman, her lover and her brother for allegedly threatening her husband and prompted him to attempt suicide two days ago.

The case has been registered on Wednesday after police and fire brigade teams saved the man from committing suicide on Tuesday.

The police said Pankaj Trivedi (33) had tried to jump off his terrace on the third floor of his residence at Shivshakti Colony on University Road.

The neighbours who spotted Trivedi had called up the police and fire brigade.

The police said Trivedi told them that he was mentally harassed and threatened by his wife Archana, whom he married six months ago.

He claimed Archana asked him to file a divorce case and claimed alimony. She reportedly threatened to slap a dowry case against him and his parents and book them under domestic violence Act.

“Based on the call details and SMS produced by Trivedi, the police have registered a case against Archana, her Jamnagar-based brother Harish Dave and her lover Anil Goswami,” said Gandhidham police.

The preliminary investigation revealed that Archana and two other accused have been threatening Trivedi and book him under dowry case, if he refused to give her divorce.

Trivedi said this was Archana’s third marriage and ever since their marriage in May 2010 she has been in constant touch with Goswami. He claimed Archana and Goswami were in a relationship for over five years and had got married to him only for alimony.

On Tuesday, Dave called Trivedi to kill him and Goswami had sent a SMS saying that they will book him and his family if he doesn’t listen to them.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

When private becomes public – Tapped private conversation made public

When private becomes public – Taped private conversation made public

Where does public interest begin and an individual's right to privacy end?

The question is being asked following the publication of transcripts of telephone conversations of lobbyist Niira Radia with certain politicians, corporate leaders and journalists. On Monday, Tata Group Chairman Ratan

Tata moved the Supreme Court to protect his right to privacy as his conversations with Radia, whose PR firm handles corporate communications for the Tatas, were splashed across at least two national magazines.

Right to privacy
In India, the right to privacy is not recognised as a separate constitutional right. However, in various judgments, the Supreme Court has held that the right to privacy is included in the fundamental right to life and personal liberty recognised under Article 21 of the Constitution.
This right is not absolute and can be curtailed, but only "according to procedure established by law".

The Supreme Court has held that right to privacy extended to telephone calls as "conversations on the telephone are often of an intimate and confidential nature". Tapping telephones, thus, is a contravention of Article 21 of the Constitution, subject to certain exceptions, unless the procedure established by law is followed.

Case by case basis
However, whether the right to privacy has been violated in a particular case would depend on the facts of the individual case and there is no blanket law or provision that covers all such cases.

Commenting on the Tata case, senior advocate Harish Salve said: "The police have the right to secretly record my telephonic conversations for investigation of a crime. But that does not mean that you can put my private conversation with my wife on websites."

Investigation of crime
It is a well settled legal position that law enforcement agencies have the right to secretly record private conversations of individuals for crime prevention, detection and investigation, provided they do it in accordance with the procedures established by law.

In fact even Tata has not disputed this in his petition. What he has questioned is the leaking of the tapes of the "private" conversations he had with Radia on the ground of violation of his right to privacy.

In India, telephone tapping is governed by the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951 that was amended to add some new provisions after the Supreme Court directed the authorities to strike a balance between the need for investigation and the right to privacy as also to check unauthorised interception of conversations.

The rules make it mandatory for the officers authorised to intercept any messages to maintain proper records of the same. These include keeping records of the names of all those to whom the intercepted material has been disclosed, the number of copies made of the intercepted messages, the period during which the authorisation to tap remained in force and the date of destruction of the tapes/CDs, transcripts, etc.

The rules also put some obligation on the service providers who are bound to maintain secrecy and destroy the recordings and transcripts pertaining to the interception within a stipulated time.

Unauthorised tapping
In February 2006, CDs of former Samajwadi Party leader Amar Singh's conversations with his party chief Mulayam Singh, film stars and businessmen were distributed to the media. These recordings were made without authorisation.

The Supreme Court passed an order banning the publication and broadcast of taped telephonic conversations of any person if done illegally. The order is still in force.

Crucial questions
As the government orders a probe into the leakage of Radia tapes, several crucial questions demand answers.

Can investigating agencies make public an individual's private and personal conversations recorded during a probe authorised by law?

The question becomes more complicated when the conversation contains derogatory and defamatory references to third parties who had nothing to do with the alleged crime under investigation.
Are the probe agencies obliged to keep secret the tapes/CDs of conversations – at least those parts that are private in nature – tapped during an investigation?

Said advocate Prashant Bhushan, who is representing the Centre for Public Interest Litigation in the 2G-spectrum case in the SC: "There are no private conversations or professional conversations. The case involves fixing government policies and planting stories in the media by Radia in the interest of her clients…and in any case public interest is paramount and it would override any privacy interest."

"Privacy cannot be treated as an omnibus rule. At the core of it lies a person's body and home, which is subject to search and seizure – an invasion authorised by law. Beyond that, even confidential business and other discussion have to yield to larger public interest," added noted jurist Rajeev Dhavan.

Making a case for transparency in public life, Dhavan said: "In the Spycatcher case (a case where English courts upheld a government ban on a book alleging that the head of British military intelligence and some other senior people were Russian spies), the English media rightly chastised even judges who upheld censorship of what was already in the public domain by calling them fools. Any prior restraint (on publication of the contents of the Radia tapes) by courts in this case would invite the death of democratic discourse."

But Salve felt that there cannot be public interest in somebody's private conversations. "You can't make India a banana republic," he said.

The bottom line
The divide, then, is quite clear.
So is the law: private conversations can be tapped in public interest but only in accordance with the law.

But such recordings can be used only for the purpose of authorised investigations, revealed only to persons authorised by law to have access and then destroyed also in terms of set procedures.
Any deviation from these principles is not permitted.

But that still doesn't clarify the grey areas: since each breach of privacy case is unique, the authorities and courts have to deal with them on a case-by-case basis.

And this can lead to decisions that aggrieved persons can consider arbitrary.

"As a general rule, public interest would override the privacy argument. But in some exceptional cases, you may have to accept the privacy plea," said eminent lawyer Ram Jethmalani.

SIFF,GHRS voice on Sexual Harassment at Workplace Bill - P7 news channel kayda kanoon 28 nov 2010

SIFF,GHRS voice on Sexual Harassment at Workplace Bill - P7 news channel kayda kanoon 28 nov 2010


PART 1/2




PART - 2/2


FIR against woman for forging legal papers

FIR against woman for forging legal paper

Sumit Saxena, Hindustan Times Email Author New Delhi, November 30, 2010

A city court has ordered registration of a criminal case against a woman who forged judicial records in the custody case of child. A metropolitan magistrate at Tis Hazari courts observed that the woman intended to gain mileage over her husband in her domestic violence cases along with her child custody case.

Laviral (name changed) and Sheila (name changed) got married in March 2007. Gagan Preet Singh and Karan Bir Singh, counsel for Laviral, told the court, “Sheila in connivance and conspiracy with unknown persons had prepared a false and forged document that is a written statement of his petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act and in her reply to the petition seeking custody of child.”

The court noted that Sheila in her reply to a case following the custody of the couple’s two-year-old son filed an affidavit with forged signatures and stamp of an oath commissioner.

“The investigating officer did not notice the forged signatures and stamps and processed the documents during the case hearing,” said the counsel for Laviral.

According to the action taken report of station house officer of Subzi Mandi police station, it was revealed that Sheila

claimed that the documents were sent to her at residence in Jhansi but the place of verification and signature on them mentioned the place as Delhi.

The court noted that facts and circumstances of the case and the statement of Sheila recorded during inquiry revealed committing of a cognizable offence by the accused and unknown persons.

Tuesday, November 30, 2010

I-T returns not gospel for deciding maintenance to be paid by husband: Bom HC

I-T returns not gospel for deciding maintenance to be paid by husband: Bom HC 

TNN, Nov 29, 2010,

MUMBAI: Tax returns are not sacrosanct when it comes to calculating the maintenance paid by a man to his estranged wife and kids, the Bombay high court has ruled.

In two recent cases, the HC thwarted the attempt of two businessmen who challenged the maintenance awarded to their wives, pointing at their paltry earnings as shown in income-tax returns. However, Justice Roshan Dalvi said, "The consideration of the income contemplated under the (Hindu Marriage Act) does not mean that only the numerical figures shown in the tax returns of a party can be taken as the gospel. The ascertainment of the income has to be done judiciously, and sensibly, not arbitrarily." or only arithmetically." ,'' the judge added.

The court said, the tax returns might be only one side of the story. "It would be absurd to consider the net income of an assessee who has various sources of income some of which may not be taxable," at all,'' the judge said.

In the first case, Dilip Singh, a businessman in the has glass industry and has offices in Goregaon and Kandivli, challenged a family court's order to pay maintenance to his estranged wife. He claimed that according to his IT papers, his income was Rs 16,000 per month but going through his documents, the court could not agree with it. went through his financial documents to find a mismatch. "In this income, the man would not be expected to have the bank account that is shown to court (with large deposits and withdrawals), the car, the share in the joint-family property, that he has purchased, the exports that he has made and the electricity expenses, that he has paid the property taxes that he has incurred or the employees he pays," he supports in several firms,'' said the judge. The court refused to believe that the market value of his share in the family residence was merely Rs 3 lakh.

The second case related to another businessman, Deepesh Mehta, who objected to a family court's order of paying Rs 40,000 per month to his wife and two sons.

He claimed his monthly income, as per his IT returns, was Rs 20,000. "A person who earns that income, if that be his only income, would not be able to invest in shares of listed companies (to the tune of Rs 55 lakh), insurance, PPF accounts, government bonds, flat, shop," said the court, dismissing his application.



Sunday, November 28, 2010

Plea to recall ruling where woman was described as ‘keep' - look who's talking of Gender Neutrality

Plea to recall ruling where woman was described as ‘keep' - look  who's talking of Gender Neutrality

Contending that the use of the expression ‘keep' in a recent judgment to describe a woman was highly derogatory and a discrimination against women on grounds of marital status, Mahila Dakshta Samiti, a women's organisation has moved the Supreme Court for its recall.

On October 21, a Bench of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Misra in a judgment had said, “not all live-in relationship will amount to a relationship in the nature of marriage to get the benefit of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005. If a man has a “keep,” whom he maintains financially and uses mainly for sexual purpose and/or as a servant it would not, in our opinion, be a “relationship in the nature of marriage. Merely spending weekends together or a one-night stand would not make it a ‘domestic relationship.”

Offended by the expressions used, the very next day, Additional Solicitor-General Indira Jaising voiced her protest before Justice Katju, who wrote the judgment, and indicated that women's organisations would be filing review petitions for recall of the ruling.

In its review petition, Mahila Dakshta Samiti said, “the expression such as ‘keep' which specifically refer to woman is based on social and cultural prejudices which need to be eliminated in order to prevent discrimination against woman. The expression would perpetuate social and cultural prejudices and is based on the idea of stereotyping woman.

It submitted that “Article 2(f) of the Convention for Elimination of Discrimination against Women calls for change in the traditional roles of men and women in bringing about gender equity. Article 2(F) provides that States should take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices, which constitute discrimination against women.”

It said, “in law only chattel can be “kept” and not human beings. Slaves could be “kept” as they are considered chattels in law and owned by the master. Hence the word ‘keep' is inappropriate in a constitutional regime such as ours which guarantees fundamental rights and the dignity of woman. The use of the expression ‘keep' violates Article 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India as it is not gender neutral and applies only to women. Further the expression ‘servants' is derogatory of the dignity of labour and they are now known as domestic help.”

The petitioner said, “while deciding the nature of the relationship, which meets the requirement of a relationship in the nature of marriage, the Supreme Court has also laid down certain relationship which do not qualify for being described as relationship in the nature of marriage.

It said the court had recorded its findings based on Wikipedia, which is an online encyclopaedia and information can be entered therein by any person and as such it may not be authentic and cannot be used for the purpose of determining the content of relationship. It was of the view that the Supreme Court was not called upon to give such observations in the facts and circumstances of the case as emerging from the judgment. The petitioner while seeking to recall the order in so far as the use of these expressions was concerned sought an oral hearing.

Friday, November 26, 2010

Press release of WCD on Protection of Women from Domestic Violence misuse

Press release of WCD on Protection of Women from Domestic Violence misuse

Friday, November 26, 201016:30 IST

The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) is implemented by the States/Union Territories. The State Governments are required to appoint Protection Officers, register Service Providers and notify shelter homes and medical facilities for implementation of the Act. The Implementation of the Act was reviewed in the meeting of the State Ministers and Secretaries in charge of Women & Child Development, on 16-17 June, 2010, and particularly with regard to the appointment of Protection Officers and registration of Service Providers.

The PWDVA is a Civil law meant to protect and provide support to victims of domestic violence. Under the Act, the aggrieved woman can seek various reliefs such as protection order, residence order, custody order, compensation order, monetary reliefs, shelter and medical facilities. The aggrieved woman can also file a complaint under Section 498A of IPC, where ever relevant. A few complaints/representations alleging misuse of the Act together with alleged misuse of 498A of IPC have been received. These complaints are primarily against alleged misuse of Section 498A IPC rather than any specific provision of the PWDVA.

Under the PWDVA, various reliefs are provided to the aggrieved women on the orders passed by the Magistrate after following due procedure. The Act also has a provision for appeal against the orders of the Magistrate. While adequate safeguards under existing laws such as Section 211 of IPC and Section 250 of CR.PC are available to deal with misuse, if any, of legal provisions, the Government in the Ministry of Home Affairs has issued an advisory on 20.10.2009 to all State Governments and Union Territory Administrations to comply with the procedure as directed by the Courts and follow the advisories issued by the Government of India from time to time, to put to rest the allegation of misuse of Section 498A of IPC.

This information was given by Smt. Krishna Tirath, Minister of State for Women and Child Development in a written reply to a question in the Lok Sabha today.


Honesty can’t be faked

Honesty can’t be faked

November 29, 2010   3:18:27 AM

Joginder Singh

The Government has grievously erred in the appointment of PJ Thomas as Central Vigilance Commissioner. It must make amends without delay

The Supreme Court of India, while hearing two separate though connected cases of public interest litigation, has raised a pertinent question by asking as to how the newly-appointed Central Vigilance Commissioner could fulfill his responsibilities since he is still an accused in a criminal case relating to irregularities in the import of palm oil. The Supreme Court has pointed out that the Central Vigilance Commissioner is supposed to order investigations into complaints of corruption received by the Commission he heads, the appellate anti-corruption body which supervises the functioning of the Central Bureau of Investigation. The accused in such complaints could well say: “You cannot deal with these as you are an accused in a criminal case yourself.”

According to the two PILs, the Union Government had ignored the Supreme Court’s guidelines for the appointment of the CVC. Under these guidelines, a three-member committee is supposed to select the CVC from a panel of civil servants with impeccable integrity and outstanding career records. The Supreme Court wanted to know whether this criterion had been followed. It also asked the Government whether the charge sheet against Mr PJ Thomas had been consistently ignored over the last 10 years during which time he was promoted several times — from being Food Secretary in Kerala he became Telecom Secretary and Secretary in the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs before being appointed CVC. The Supreme Court said, “We are not against the person but we are on his office... We want to know if he, being an accused, is able to function at this sensitive post.” The Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau of Kerala had filed the charge sheet in the palm oil import scam as per Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act after securing proper sanction.

The Attorney-General later commented that if the criterion of ‘impeccable integrity’ were to be strictly applied then even the appointments of several judges and others holding constitutional office would be “subject to scrutiny and challenged”. The Attorney-General, perhaps, may not be aware that for every worthwhile appointment, including that of the judges, a vigilance clearance is required. The appointment of Chief Vigilance Officers of Government departments and public sector undertakings is cleared by the CVC after obtaining necessary reports from the CBI and other agencies. In fact, the Chief Justice of India rammed home the point by saying that under service rules, someone with a charge sheet pending against him would not even be considered for a promotion.

There is more than what meets the eye in all high profile appointments by the Government irrespective of the party in power. Rulers who abide by ethics do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly; those who are unscrupulous constantly seek a way around laws. The top bureaucrats — the Cabinet Secretary, the Home Secretary and the Principal Secretary — are all from Kerala. A phone call or an e-mail from any of them would have fetched them the latest information about the status of the case against Mr Thomas. The officer cannot be faulted for the munificence of the Government, but his colleagues who suppressed facts must share the blame. Fellow bureaucrats have got him a post-retirement job, that too with the status of a Supreme Court judge, that will keep him in comfort at taxpayers’ expense for another five years.

Indeed, the Union and the State Governments run an employment exchange for retired officers who have not only toed the line laid down by their political bosses but also, when asked to bend, have chosen to crawl. There are more than 400 committees and commissions which are practically reserved for retired officers. This is strange as most of the working officers in senior positions do not have even half-an-hour of work. Sometime back I ran into a Secretary to the Government and asked him was work. He said since he did not toe the line of his Minister the post of OSD was created for him. He defined OSD not as Officer on Special Duty but Officer in Search of Duty.

The only condition of post-retirement employment is that the bureaucrat should not only be flexible but also pliable. It is said in jest that civil servants lose a vertebra of their backbone for every one or two years of their service. By the time they retire, barring honourable exceptions, most of them become spineless wonders. They do so in the interest of their survival and occupying good posts till they kick the bucket. Nobody doubts the integrity of the Prime Minister, but he seems to have an incredible amount of faith in a corrupt bureaucracy which does not place all the facts before him. Why should the Government try to justify the unjustifiable? It has blundered in the appointment of the CVC.

Good governance requires hard work and the courage to take decisions. You do not need Solomon’s wisdom to realize that our actions produce reactions. When the Government has fixed the retirement age for bureaucrats at 60, why should some be favoured with extensions in service for five years by being appointed to various commissions or constitutional posts? The Government swears by the rule of law and fairplay but more often than not it treats some as more equal than others.

Thanks to the Supreme Court, the law of the land still remains alive and is periodically upheld as above all, no matter how powerful the individuals or institutions concerned may be. The Government must realize that there is no room for legal hair splitting on the pertinent questions raised by the Supreme Court in the case pertaining to the appointment of the CVC in violation of all norms and guidelines. There really should be no need to remind the Prime Minister, whose integrity is unimpeachable and who has a high sense of probity that governance is largely about being honest and speaking the truth, no matter how bitter it may be. Given the fact that the Prime Minister is widely seen as an honest individual, he should take the initiative in rectifying the blunder made by his Government in the appointment of Mr Thomas as the CVC. He is clearly not the right choice for the job; he should be removed and due diligence must be applied in finding an officer to replace him. There is no shortage of those who fit the bill and have an unblemished record. What Carlyle said for individuals is equally applicable to the Government: Make yourself an honest man, and then you may be sure there is one less rascal in the world.

Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

AHMEDABAD: The Gujarat HC on Thursday slapped a penalty of Rs 1 lakh on Dashrath Devda, president of Akhil Bharatiya Patni Atyachar Virodhi Sangh for protesting against alleged misuse of domestic violence laws. A division bench fined him for filing frivolous PIL and for wasting court's time.

Devda had approached the HC by way of filing a PIL demanding judicial interference in the alleged misuse of protection laws for women. He was demanding a protection in legislation for men, who are according to him henpecked by their wives.

Devda has been claiming that women have abused the laws, which are in favour of them, but certain protection for men is also required against the misuse of the legislation. He filed this PIL, which came up for hearing before a division bench. When Devda began arguments as party-in-person, the court asked him to withdraw his PIL because his demand was to amend the legislation. Refusing to pay any attention to what the court was hinting at, Devda continued to argue how women in this country are worshipped, and no law is required for their protection. However, the chief justice repeatedly asked him to withdraw the PIL.

Ultimately, the court imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on Devda and asked him to pay the money to the Self Employed Women's Association — an NGO working for women empowerment. The court has directed Devda to pay the amount of penalty within two months.

Devda and members of his association often stage demonstrations and take out rallies in the city in protest against the domestic violence laws. They also help men in court proceedings, who face charges of domestic violence from their spouses. In this PIL also, Devda tried to assert their views that different pieces of legislation favouring women are misused, and ultimate sufferers are the family members. The association has been protesting against anti-dowry law of Section 498A of IPC, alimony related provisions in Section 125 of CrPC and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

Re-look at the dealings of Domestic Violence Act and Section 498a of the IPC-women's movement should focus more on protecting families than fighting against men

Re-look at the dealings of Domestic Violence Act and Section 498a of the IPC-women's movement should focus more on protecting families than fighting against men 
MYSORE: The Ashodaya Samithi, an organization helping sex workers and University of Mysore highlighted various forms of violence, harassment and exploitation faced by women in society, on Thursday. The event was held to observe international day for elimination of violence against women. It emphasized on the fact that decline in human values has led to various problems faced by women in society.

Southern police range departmental enquiry cell DySP Dharanidevi Malagatti said where there are no human values there will be more exploitation and harassment. Violence against women is always a violation of human rights and is still prevalent in society.

Demanding salary from women, restricting women's freedom, forcing women to go for work, etc., all amounts to crime under Domestic Violation Act. The fairer sex is still tolerating various kinds of harassment in their places of work and at home, said Dharanidevi and sought an end to violence against women.

Sociology department chairman Gururaj B felt the need to accelerate efforts to educate people, particularly those from the lower and middle classes, as they are usually the silent victims of harassment and exploitation.

Expressing concern over the misuse of laws, the chairman claimed that 75% of cases filed against men for harassment is false. Quoting a report of mid-1990s, he stated that over 1.25 lakh women had committed suicide over harassment in India, whereas the number of men who ended lives over similar charges had crossed 1.5 lakh. "We need to take a re-look at the dealings of Domestic Violence Act and Section 498a of the IPC. Also the women's movement should focus more on protecting families than fighting against men," he stated.

 Decline in values has led to violence against women - The Times of India

Sunday, November 21, 2010

Marital stress drives more men to suicide than women-Demand Men's Welfare Ministry and National Commision for Men- nternational Men’s day 2010

Marital stress drives more men to suicide than women-Demand Men's Welfare Ministry and National Commision for Men on International Men’s day 2010

Rebecca Samervel TNN


Has the equation in the war of the sexes changed

Strange it may sound,but the National Crime Record Bureau (NCRB) figures released by a city-based mens rights advocacy group shows that the number of married men ending their lives is far more than their female counterparts.And the group claims that the men to women suicide ratio of 65:35 indicates that it is the men can now don the tag of the oppressed sex.

The data was revealed on the World Mens Day by the Indian Family Foundation,a global movement started by the families of Indian men facing abuse in the hands of their wives.According to the figures mentioned in the report in 2008,57,639 married men across the country killed themselves,compared to 30,224 married women.Every nine minutes,an Indian husband commits suicide.Men contribute to 92 % taxes but face 100% ignorance, an organization member said.

The organization pointed out that most of the men who ended their lives were often ridiculed as being weak and irresponsible and denied any support or counselling.No one believes that men can be victims of domestic violence.But a survey shows that in the past 12 years,1,70,000 married men have committed suicide,as they could no longer bear the domestic strife, Zaveri added.

The organization blames the phenomenon on the fact that the world has turned a deaf ear to all the complaints coming from men.There is no limit to the expectations from a man.The unaddressed domestic abuse and family disputes are taking a huge toll on married men.No one shares their pain and there is no social support system for these distressed men, an organization member said.In spite of the suicide of the doctor from Lucknow who left behind a suicide note accusing his wife and in-laws of cruelty,no action has been taken by the police.

The group is now urging the government to start a ministry for men and also a National Commission for Men on the lines of the ones that exist for women.If there can be a government organization for women,children and even animals,we deserve to have one as well, Zaveri said.

Indian Family Foundation (IFF) Activists protest Rakhi Sawant's remarks on International Men’s Day - Demand Men's Welfare Ministry and National Commision for Men

Indian Family Foundation (IFF) Activists protest Rakhi Sawant's remarks on International Men’s Day - Demand Men's Welfare Ministry and National Commision for Men


Demanding the arrest of Rakhi Sawant in connection with the recent controversy on her TV show, a group of male activists from the Indian Family Foundation (IFF) came together on International Men’s day on Friday, raised the grievances of men and spoke about the alleged misuse of women-centric laws in the country.

“If a woman was called impotent on national TV, we are sure that the National Commission for Women would have ensured that the male host was behind the bars,” says Bunty Jain, vice-president, IFF. “We are not against women but we are looking for gender neutrality in the country,” says Jain.

According to the National Crime Records Bureau, in the last 12 years, 1,70,000 married men have committed suicide due to domestic violence. Reflecting upon the rising figures of suicide rates among Indian husbands, the IFF questioned this bias and demanded separate machinery to record complaints by men under cognisable offences.

Milind Chindarkar’s wife committed suicide on February 18, 2010, and it has been established in the post-mortem report that her death was due to hanging. His sister told DNA, “Our family is falsely accused in abetting her suicide. He has not been proven guilty but is undergoing imprisonment for nine months. He is not getting bail on the grounds that he might tamper with evidence once he’s out. We have lost my sister-in-law already, we are fearful of losing my brother.”

In another case, on October 3, 2008, Husain Ali Khan’s wife Alimunisa left home, and after eight months, accused the family of cruelty under section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code (husband or relative of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) in April 2009. She has demanded maintenance charges of Rs25,000 per month, and a flat. Khan’s sister Shaheeda says, “We hadn’t even asked her family for dowry.”

“Since laws in the country favour women, men’s trust in marriage is decreasing, giving way to live-in relationships,” says Jinesh Zaveri, activist with the IFF.

Saturday, November 20, 2010

Why not a national Commission for men?

This is a very legitimate demand to protect men. In the name of women empowerment, Govt of India is harassing men. The NCRB suicide rate of men and women is an eye-opener evidence that men are being harassed from all sides : from Govt to police to judiciary. Especially the suicide rate of married men. Suicide rate of men and women before marriage is almost same. But after marriage the suicide rate of men is double that of women. Where any suicide and accidental death of women after marriage is termed as dowry death men suicide is not recognized at all and hence there is no forum for men to knock at for help.

CHENNAI: On the occasion of International Men's Day on Friday, the All India Men's Welfare Association (AIMWA) reiterated its demand to the Union Government that a National Commission for Men (on the lines of National Commission for Women) be set up to study issues of men.Suresh Ram, member of AIMWA, said, "For the third year since the association has been formed, we are reiterating the important and righteous demand before the government, but nothing seems to be moving in that way." Strongly demanding amendments into 84odd Acts and laws that has been seen by the association as antimen, Suresh said, "Most of them were used only to harass and blackmail men (by women), and 98 per cent of such cases were never led to conviction and finally they turned out to be fake complaints." The need for seeking national commission for men was to ensure rights and other privileges given to men in the society, he added.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Delhi HC orders contempt case against father of girl for resiling from mutual consent divorce agreement of daughter after extorting the agreed amount

The Delhi High Court has initiated contempt proceedings against the father of a Germany-based woman for backing out from a mutual consent divorce agreement in exchange of Rs 12 lakh. In March 2010, the woman had moved the Delhi High Court against her husband, charging him with domestic violence.

Her Delhi-based father filed a case of domestic violence and dowry demand against his bed-ridden daughter's husband.

Later, she agreed for a mutual-consent divorce for Rs 12 lakh.

Sunny and Sheila (names changed) married in 2002 in Delhi. During her stay in Germany, Sheila developed multiple sclerosis.

In 2008, she filed cases in Germany against her husband.

At present, the couple lives separately in Germany.

Prabhjit Jauhar, counsel for Sunny, in his petition said: "Sheila registered false complainants with the German court. Later German investigative authorities found that those complaints were false."

Jauhar told the court that Sheila was not summoned, as the German court noted she was suffering from an acute disease.

In March 2010, Sheila, through her father, informed the Delhi High Court's Mediation Conciliation Centre, that a divorce by mutual consent should be agreed upon for a sum of R12 lakh. She also gave her consent to quash the FIR against her husband.

However on November 1, Sheila's father said he was not willing to comply with the terms of agreement signed in March.

"It is a clear breach of undertaking given to the court and amounts to contempt," Jauhar submitted in court.

Justice GS Sistani said: "Respondent (father of the woman) has willfully violated the terms of settlement agreed upon. Issue notice to show cause, as to why contempt proceedings should be not initiated."

Sunny, in his petition, alleged that he has already deposited R12 lakh with the registry department of the High Court in March 2010.

The court has directed Sheila's father to be personally present in court on the next date of hearing.

Woman to face trial for lodging false rape case – PERJURY : Delhi high court

The Delhi high court today refused to quash a false criminal case of rape lodged by a Delhi police woman employee against a man to ensure that she faces prosecution later for falsely implicating him.

"If a prosecutrix makes false statement of an offence punishable with minimum period of 7 years imprisonment, she must be made to face the consequence of registering a false FIR against an innocent person," said Justice Shiv Narayan Dhingra, dismissing a petition by a Delhi-based property dealer Karan for quashing of the FIR against him.

Justice Dhingra dismissed the petition despite his plea that the woman has admitted to making false accusations against him early this year and they have reached an out-of-court settlement of the issue.

"I consider that an offence under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code being punishable with minimum sentence of seven years cannot be looked at so lightly," Justice Dhingra said.

"The prosecutrix cannot be allowed to turn around and say that she made a false statement and that now she has compromised the matter," he added, refusing to quash the FIR, and leaving it to the trial court to acquit the man and initiate prosecution against the woman instead on charges of perjury.

"The court cannot allow quashing of such FIR when neither the prosecutrix is being punished for making false statement nor the accused is brought to book for the offence of rape," he said.


Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Court to NCT govt: Frame rules to deal with dowry deaths

Court to NCT govt: Frame rules to deal with dowry deaths

A Delhi court on Monday expressed its displeasure over "inaction" on the part of the NCT government in framing proper rules for executive magistrates to follow in case of unnatural death of a woman due to dowry harassment. Additional Sessions Judge R K Gauba also decried a practice followed by the

Delhi police in which they wait for a Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM) to send a report in order to register an FIR in case of death caused due to dowry demand.

The court sought a report from the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) Headquarters on November 23 to apprise it whether any instruction has been sent to all police officers with regard to registration of FIRs in such cases.

It issued the notice while awarding a woman and her two daughters with 10 years rigorous imprisonment for driving her daughter-in-law to commit suicide on December six, 2005 within 10 months of her marriage.

"There seems to be inaction on the part of the state government in framing appropriate rules for purposes of sections 174/ 176 (police to inquire and report on suicide etc and inquiry by magistrate into cause of death respectively)of the CrPC," the court said.

During the trial in the case, the court noted that there was a substantial delay in registration of the FIR in the matter despite information sent to Prasad Nagar police station by Kamla Devi, mother of victim Chanda Kumar, following her suicide. The police, instead, waited for an instruction of the SDM to register the case. The SHO concerned sat over the order of the SDM stating that there was no specific direction to register the FIR even though the nature of offence was cognizable.

The court noted that the SDM, on his part, also did not issue proper instruction to the police under the procedure.

"The manner in which the SDM conducted his proceedings in this case has left much to be desired. His lack of training, instruction and preparedness to discharge responsibilities of this nature has come out vividly in the course of this trial.

"The evidence has also shown that the SDM never cared to even prepare any final report of the inquest. These aspects need to be taken up further with the concerned quarters in the executive branch of the government," the court said.

In its judgement, the court imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 each on victim's mother-in-law Premawati and his sisters-in-law Deepa Bala and Lalita after holding them guilty of abetment of suicide and cruelty.

Monday, November 15, 2010

Woman booked for murder after husband dies of injuries in Mumbai

Woman booked for murder after husband dies of injuries in Mumbai

The Vakola police have registered a case of murder against a housewife on Sunday.

The 31-year-old woman, Jyoti, allegedly set her husband, Rajendra Jaiswal, on fire in September after she learnt that he had been involved in an extra-marital affair.

Initially, police booked Jyoti for attempt to murder. She, on the other hand, had registered a case of dowry harassment against Rajendra. However, after her husband died due to his burn injuries on Sunday, police have registered a murder case against her.

According to the police, the incident occurred at the Jaiswals' residence on September 29 afternoon. The couple initially had an argument over household issues that later turned into a heated exchange of words and then a scuffle. Following this Jyoti brought a bottle filled with kerosene, poured the liquid over Jaiswal and set him ablaze.

"Jyoti also sustained thirty per cent burns and had earlier told the police in her statement that Jaiswal had burnt himself and she got burnt while trying to save him. She also claimed that Jaiswal had been harassing her and demanding dowry ever since they got married in 2004," said an officer fromVakola police station.
Rajendra had sustained 55% burns and was admitted in a hospital at Santa Cruz (East). Jyoti was admitted at VN Desai Hospital for treatment.

"Initially, we filed cross complaints following the duo's statements. But after Rajendra's death, we have registered a case of murder against Jyoti but have not arrested her till now. We will investigate the case and then take action. The body has been sent to Cooper Hospital for post mortem," said senior police inspector Anil Kharade.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Wishing my all children A VERY HAPPY INTERNATIONAL CHILDREN’S DAY- makes my eyes wet each time i see this video


Delhi district court-Three acquitted in dowry death case. Suicide due to Illicit relationship given color of dowry demand and death by Girl’ family

Delhi district court-Three acquitted in dowry death case. Suicide due to Illicit relationship given color of dowry demand and death by Girl’ family

New Delhi, Nov 14 (PTI) A Delhi court has acquitted a man and his parents of the charges of causing death of the former''s wife for dowry, noting that the accused were financially well-off to raise such demands.
Additional Sessions Judge Kamini Lau absolved Pankaj Raj, his father Surender Kumar and mother Kamlesh of the charges under Section 304 B (dowry death) and 498 A (cruelty) of the IPC.
The court took into account a number of facts like Raj''s earnings, the gifts he had given to his wife Ritu, the places he took her to on their honeymoon, besides the financial condition of Kumar and the victim.
It said that Ritu was maintaining an independent bank account and had even paid Rs 40,000 to her brother for buying a motorbike after her marriage with Raj on December 9, 2005 to conclude that she herself was capable of taking care of her financial requirements.
The court further said the demands for articles like TV and AC do not appear "plausible" as Raj was the only son of his parents and his sister was settled in the USA as professor at Harvard University.
It also said that besides the mother and brother of the deceased, no one else from her family including the father was cited as witness by the prosecution to prove their charges.

"It is clear from the evidence of the witnesses that the deceased has committed suicide but it cannot be related to any dowry-related harassment by the accused as apparently there is no proximity or link between her death and the alleged misconduct by the accused persons," the court said.
During the trial, the accused tried to point out to the court that the victim could not reconcile with her marriage as she got attached with a boy with whom she was earlier engaged and was even in touch with before committing suicide on April 10, 2006 at her matrimonial home in Janak Puri here within five months of her marriage.
"The prosecution story does not inspire confidence and is not worthy of credence, especially in view of the glaring contradictions and overwhelming inconsistencies in the statements of witnesses," the court said, acquitting the accused.

Judicial accountability Bill, cure worse than disease and Without transparency, there could be no accountability: Justice Shah

Judicial accountability Bill, cure worse than disease: Justice Shah

November 14, 2010

Without transparency, there could be no accountability

Highlighting serious lacunae in the proposed Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010, the former Chief Justice of the Delhi and Madras High Courts Justice of Delhi and Madras High Courts Ajit Prakash Shah on Saturday cautioned that the measure was an example of cure being worse than the disease.

“There is a complete misalignment and a mismatch between the present system of judicial appointments and core values of judicial accountability.”

He was delivering the keynote address after inaugurating a two-day seminar on “Strengthening Democracy: Role of Judiciary” organised here by the International Centre Goa (ICG) in association with the Media Information and Communication Centre of India, the Friedrich Ebert foundation-India and the Goa High Court Bar Association.

Emphasising the need for accountability, Justice Shah said that without transparency, there could be no accountability; secrecy was only the preserve of a dictatorship.

Analysing judicial accountability and its nuances, Justice Shah said there must be a balance between the competing principles of judicial independence, on the one hand, and accountability and transparency, on the other.

Straightjacket definition

His primary objection is that the Bill seeks to provide a straightjacket definition of “misbehaviour” under Section 2(j), which tends to lose its elasticity and become both under-inclusive and over-inclusive. A minor, inadvertent breach of judicial standards could constitute misconduct, and in so far as the definition is exhaustive, it is incapable of catching within its fold any “misbehaviour” that might not be covered by this provision.

Secondly, he said, the Bill tended to render the Oversight Committee just a post office referring each complaint to the Scrutiny Panel. This was likely to lead to multiplicity of complaints against judges and also a colossal waste of time.

Justice Shah's major objection is to the composition of the Scrutiny Panel which consists of three members, two of whom would be judges sitting in the same court as the judge against whom a complaint has been made. It would be difficult for judges to dispassionately decide a case against one of their own colleagues and sitting with them day in, day out.

Also, the composition and tenure of the Investigation Committee was undefined. Theoretically, therefore, it was possible for a layperson without any knowledge, experience and standing to be part of an inquiry panel against a sitting judge of a superior court.

Justice Shah said the Bill would create an atmosphere of total secrecy, more regressive than the present system, and there did not appear to be any rational reason for the change.

The idea of “minor” punishment was unworkable and it had the potential to seriously undermine judicial status.

Only binary system will work

A situation where sitting judges were publicly censured but they were still sitting on the Bench and deciding cases would damage the credibility of the entire system.

“This is an area where only a binary system of punishment can work. Either the judge is guilty and must be impeached, or he is not, and no action must be taken against him,” Justice Shah said, observing that the challenge was to develop mechanisms of accountability that did not undermine judicial independence.

Later speaking on ‘Accountability vs. Independence of Judiciary', Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan described the Bill as a “cosmetic exercise designed to fool the people into believing that some kind of exercise was conducted by the government to clean up corruption in the judiciary.” The outcome of it would be absolutely “zero.”

“If the government was serious on judicial accountability, then why is it not opening out consultations with public,” asked Mr. Bhushan and dubbed any exercise of consultations with judges “bogus” because judges had a vested interest in the Bill.

Goa Speaker Pratapsingh Rane and ICG Director Nandini Sahai were present.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

Kumble’s wife fined in custody case for delaying tactics

Kumble’s wife fined in custody case for delaying tactics

A city family court on Thursday imposed costs of Rs 2,500 on cricketer Anil Kumble’s wife Chetana, in connection with a child custody case she is fighting with her former husband.

Speaking to Bangalore Mirror, her former husband Kumar Jagirdar claimed the fine imposed by principal judge M G Sudheendra was on account of the ‘delaying tactics’ adopted by her lawyer. In July, she was fined Rs 1,250 by the court, Jagirdar said.
The couple were married in 1986 and divorced two years later. Jagirdar is fighting for custody of their daughter, who is 15 now and stays with the Kumbles.
In 2003, Jagirdar lost his case in the Supreme Court, which felt his single status was not enough to take care of the child but said he could approach a lower court if there was a change in the circumstances of the parties concerned.
In 2006, he moved a city family court for custody, arguing that his former wife had two children from Kumble, that he was married and not single anymore, and that his daughter had reached the age of 15.
The next hearing in the case is on Nov 25, Jagirdar’s counsel P B Appaiah said.
An affidavit filed by Chetana in the court on Thursday said her counsel was held up at the high court on the day of the previous hearing, and expressed regret for the inconvenience. Her advocate C V Nagesh said he would conduct the cross-examination of the petitioner at the next hearing.

Friday, November 12, 2010

SC acknowledges gross abuse of ANTI DOWRY LAWS - Bombay high court rapped for wrongly convicting man

SC acknowledges gross abuse of ANTI DOWRY LAWS - Bombay high court rapped for wrongly convicting man

New Delhi, Nov 12(PTI) Noting that his wife had committed suicide after her illicit relationship stood exposed, the Supreme Court has set aside the conviction imposed on a doctor and his parents by the Bombay High Court, saying it was a clear-cut case of gross abuse of dowry laws.

The apex court minced no words in expressing displeasure at the manner in which the High Court had convicted Dr Sunil Kumar Sambhudayal Gupta by erroneously reversing the acquittal order passed by the Sessions Court.

"The High Court dealt with the case very casually, adopting a very superficial approach to the whole matter and brushed aside the allegation of an illicit relationship for which there had been documentary evidence on record," a Bench of Justices P Sathasivam and B  Chauhan observed in their judgement.

The apex court said the manner in which the doctor and his parents were framed by the in-laws revealed the extent to which the anti-dowry laws were being abused in the country."It is a clearcut case of gross abuse of dowry laws.

The High Court did not make any attempt to appreciate the evidence with accuracy and reversed the findings of the trial court which were based on the evidence on record and for which detailed reasons had been assigned," the apex court said.

The court ruling came on an appeal by the doctor, a Mumbai-resident, and his parents. Married in December 1978, Gupta''s wife committed suicide in September 1985 by hanging herself.

Following the suicide, her brother Rajesh lodged a complaint with the police accusing the husband of illtreating his sister for dowry culminating in the suicide.The trial court acquitted the three as the prosecution failed to prove the charges against them.
Referring to her going into depression following the exposure of her illicit relationship with a neighbour and her strained life at home, the trial court concluded that Gupta''s wife "had been suffering from epilepsy, psychosis and depression and had been getting regular treatment for the same."

"Therefore it was not a case of dowry demand or treating her with cruelty," the trial court had held.But the High Court had convicted them, saying the defence had not been able to prove its version.Concurring with the trial court''s view, the apex court said, "The high court committed an error in shifting the burden of proof to the defence".

"In fact, the prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the failure of the defence to prove its version cannot be ground for conviction.

"We find it difficult to sustain the conviction of the appellants (the man and his parents) on aforesaid counts (of dowry harassment and abetment to suicide)," said the Bench, while acquitting the man and his parents yesterday," the court said.

Full Text available @

Delhi courts - Woman files Domestic violence case against daughter-in-law

72-yr-old says daughter-in-law frequently beat her up, turned her out of her home; bahu says opposite is true

A 72-Year-old woman has filed a case against her daughter-in-law under the Domestic Violence Act.
Complainant Kanta Sudhakar Sharma claimed her daughter-in-law Ruby had beaten her up frequently and extorted money from her on several occasions.

Ruby had another story to tell, saying it was she who was the aggrieved party.
"My husband Ajay is living with another woman and is hand-in-glove with his mother. Both have plotted to force me to leave home," said Ruby. "For this man I left my family and changed my religion. But when they asked for dowry and harassed me, I did not bow to their demands. Now that he has found someone else, he and his mother are trying every trick to force me to vacate my flat."

Kanta refuted the allegations. She said she had filed a police complaint at the Hinjewadi police station in October 2009, but found the police took no action.

She then filed a case under the Domestic Violence Act 2005, under Sections 18, 19 and 23, seeking restoration of her legal right to live in the property which she jointly owns with her son.
"Ruby mortgaged my flat for Rs 10 lakh without consulting me. My son left home after he was subjected to continuous torture by my daughter-in-law," said Kanta. "He has sent her a notice for restitution of conjugal rights in May this year. Even after I was driven out of my home, my daughter-in-law continued to demand money to pay the electricity bill."

Kanta has also sought police protection and Rs 5,000 monthly maintenance from her son and daughter-in-law.

Legal position
Her lawyer, Advocate Dinkar Bhavsar said his client would continue to fight for justice.
"We filed a case on August 2 this year. My client has filed a case against her daughter-in-law and son after she was shown the door. We are talking about a complainant who is 72, is a blood pressure patient and has been frequently beaten up," said Bhavsar. "The respondent even took objection, saying that the respondent in a domestic violence case can not be a woman, but according to the law the respondent can be any person related to the husband. In this case the respondents are the son and his wife." Ruby said it was difficult for her to go through the tormenting situation.

"Whatever she says is a lie. I got married to Ajay in 2005, changed my religion and became Hindu for them," said Ruby. "Ajay is living with the other woman and whatever my mother-in-law is doing is just to vacate the flat. Ajay even stooped to the level of calling me just to force me to listen to him making love to the other

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

‘Mum can’t prevent dad from meeting their child’ Karnataka HC (Banglore) Landmark ruling in favor of Shared parenting and upholding fathers’ rights on his children

Kudos to the CJI for a great order to curb such unscrupulous mothers from conducting such henious tactics of depriving fathers of their natural rights.
Hope the Indian judiciary wakes up to the true realities and shrugg off its biased attitude in Child custody cases


‘Mum can’t prevent dad from meeting their child’ Karnataka HC (Banglore) Landmark ruling in favor of Shared parenting and upholding fathers’ rights on his children


Hearing divorce case, chief justice Khehar rules in favour of husband who was denied visitation rights. But the real drama took place outside the court when the lawyer’s former wife turned up

author -

Posted On Wednesday, November 10, 2010 at 05:27:31 AM

In what is being seen as a landmark judgment in cases related to divorce and visitation rights of parents on their children, the high court of Karnataka on Tuesday ruled in favour of a husband who was prevented from seeing his son for over 10 months.

 madhuri mother crying-didnt allowed father to meet kid-hc inside

Photo - Seeing Madhuri cry in court, the CJ said, “This is not going to affect us”

In what is being seen as a landmark judgment in cases related to divorce and visitation rights of parents on their children, the high court of Karnataka on Tuesday ruled in favour of a husband who was prevented from seeing his son for over 10 months.

In what is being seen as a landmark judgment in cases related to divorce and visitation rights of parents on their children, the high court of Karnataka on Tuesday ruled in favour of a husband who was prevented from seeing his son for over 10 months.
The ruling came on the divorce proceedings of Shivkumar Challa and Madhuri who were married in 1996. Their son Rahul was born in 2000. Madhuri is being represented by James Arun Kumar.

Threat of jail
The court berated Madhuri for not following its order to allow her husband to meet Rahul every Sunday.

“We will send you to jail. Do you understand what jail is? You will be sent there right from here. Then your counsel can go to the Supreme Court,” chief justice J S Khehar told a stunned Madhuri in open court.

“Since January, how many Sundays have the father and son met? Not a single Sunday should be missed. Follow the order. If you fail, the following day you should be present in court at 10.30 am to tender an explanation for the same. Jail is a very bad thing. We look upon you as children. But even children should be reprimanded.”

At this point, Madhuri started crying profusely. Seeing this, the chief justice told her, “This is not going to affect us.”
Challa then told the court, “My child’s life is in danger.” But the court told him to stick to the present case, that of child visitation rights.

Lawyer gets it too
After the division bench of the chief justice and justice A S Bopanna had read its order, James Arun Kumar began to plead Madhuri’s case again.

But the chief justice said, “Do not play tricks. Do not play with words. We will be only too happy to take action. You are giving one explanation after the other. We will not allow this to happen. On Monday, you wasted 30 minutes of the court’s time. It will not be allowed to happen again. If there is the slightest deviation from the order, severe action will be taken. We are fed up with this case.”

But the real drama happened outside the court as James Arun Kumar’s former wife Geetha and son Jason showed up. Challa had told Bangalore Mirror that Madhuri and his son were staying with James Arun Kumar who had divorced Geetha seven years ago.
As Challa came out of the court with his mother-in-law (Madhuri’s mother), Geetha told her, “You have not brought up your daughter properly. She stole my husband.”

Madhuri’s mother retorted, “Your husband stole my daughter.”

Son’s plea
Geetha and her son then turned to Madhuri. Geetha berated Madhuri for ‘taking away my husband’,
which led to a heated argument.

While Challa is fighting for visitation rights on his son, Geetha’s son wants his father back. Jason said, “My father drops Madhuri’s son Rahul to the same school where I am enrolled while I go by bus. I want my father back.”

My father drops Madhuri’s son to the same school where I’m enrolled while I go by bus. I want him back
Jason, son of lawyer challa