दहेज हत्या केस में मुकदमे के लिए आरोपी का खून और विवाह का रिश्ता होना चाहिए: SC

दहेज हत्या केस में मुकदमे के लिए आरोपी का खून और विवाह का रिश्ता होना चाहिए: SC

Thursday, July 3, 2014

नई दिल्ली : उच्चतम न्यायालय ने व्यवस्था दी है कि दहेज हत्या के मामले में किसी व्यक्ति पर मुकदमा चलाने के लिये उसे उस समय तक रिश्तेदार नहीं माना जा सकता जब तक पति से उसका खून, विवाह या गोद लिए जाने का रिश्ता नहीं हो।

शीर्ष अदालत ने साथ ही स्पष्ट किया कि उसका तात्पर्य यह नहीं है कि ऐसे व्यक्ति पर आत्महत्या के लिए उकसाने जैसे आरोप में मुकदमा नहीं चलाया जा सकता।

न्यायमूर्ति चंद्रमौलि कुमार प्रसाद और न्यायमूर्ति पी सी घोष की खंडपीठ ने कहा कि उन्हें इसमें कोई संदेह नहीं है कि भारतीय दंड संहिता की धारा 304 (बी) (दहेज हत्या) में पति के रिश्तेदार शब्द का आशय उन व्यक्तियों से है जिनका खून, विवाह या गोद लिए जाने के रिश्ते से संबंधित है।

न्यायालय ने दहेज हत्या के मामले में पंजाब एवं हरियाणा उच्च न्यायालय के फैसले के खिलाफ पंजाब सरकार की अपील पर यह व्यवस्था दी। राज्य सरकार ने इस मामले में एक व्यक्ति को आरोपी के रूप में सम्मन जारी करने का निर्णय निरस्त करने के उच्च न्यायालय के आदेश को चुनौती दी थी।

निचली अदालत ने इस मामले में एक व्यक्ति को आरोपी के रूप में तलब किया था। अदालत का कहना था कि वह मृतक महिला के पति का रिश्तेदार है और इस अपराध में शामिल है।

शीर्ष अदालत ने कहा कि यह व्यक्ति मृतक के पति की रिश्तेदार का भाई है और वह कानून में प्रदत्त पति के रिश्तेदार की परिभाषा के दायरे में नहीं आता है। न्यायालय ने कहा कि धारा 304-बी से यह ध्वनि निकलती है कि जब किसी महिला की विवाह के सात साल के भीतर सामान्य परिस्थितियों से इतर जलने या किसी दूसरी प्रकार की चोटों की वजह से मृत्यु होती है तो यह माना जायेगा कि उसके पति या पति के किसी रिश्तेदार से दहेज की खातिर हत्या का अपराध किया है यदि यह पता चलता है कि मृत्यु से ठीक पहले महिला के प्रति उसके पति या पति के किसी रिश्तेदार ने क्रूरता की है या उसे प्रताड़ित किया है।

शीर्ष अदालत ने उच्च न्यायालय का आदेश सही ठहराते हुये राज्य सरकार की अपील खारिज कर दी। न्यायालय ने कहा कि भारतीय दंड संहिता में ‘रिश्तेदार’ को परिभाषित नहीं किया गया है।

Source-http://zeenews.india.com/hindi/news/india/anti-dowry-law-misused-no-automatic-arrest-such-cases-sc/227040

Failure of live-in relations a major reason for increase in rape cases, claims Delhi High Court

Failure of live-in relations a major reason for increase in rape cases, claims Delhi High Court

Thursday, 19 June 2014 - 5:07pm IST | Agency: PTI

Failure of live-in relationship or young adults acting immaturely by getting into commitments that end up in break-ups are among major reasons for increase in rape cases, the Delhi High Court has observed. The court also cautioned parents of young couples to behave with "more sensitivity" while dealing with such issues.

A bench of justices Kailash Gambhir and Sunita Gupta made the observation while upholding the life term awarded to four members of a Delhi-based girl's family, including her father, for killing her lover as they did not approve of their relationship.

Anguished over the killing of the 24-year-old youth, the bench said young adults, especially girls, need to be more responsible and act maturely when taking important decisions like getting married or entering into a live-in relationship. "The need of the hour is that boys and more importantly girls have to be very careful and cautious before taking such an important decision concerning their lives before entering into the most sanctimonious relationship of marriage or even to have live-in relationship.  "One of the major reasons contributing to increase in the rape cases is failure of live-in relationship or any immature decision on the part of such young adults which more often end up in a broken relationship but sometimes after indulging into physical relationship," it said.

However, this placed an implied onus on the shoulders of the persons involved in such relationships to act responsibly and maturely, it said.

Parents are "expected to behave with more sensitivity and maturity as such issues need to be resolved with patience, understanding and tolerance and instead of indifference or with a bent of mind of alienating the two", the court said. "It is often noticed that any impetuous act to smother such relationships often has a backlash in the form of resentful feelings or even rebellious actions.

"Therefore, it is with great sensitivity that the parents need to acknowledge the growing independence of their children and rationally and dispassionately deal with these emotive issues giving due respect to their feelings," the bench added.

24-year-old Kuldeep was stabbed to death on the evening of October 14, 2006, by his lover's father, Ravi Kumar and her three uncles Karamvir, Raj Kumar and Sanjay at Uttam Nagar in west Delhi.

According to the prosecution, the four had acted with the common intention of eliminating Kuldeep as they believed he had damaged their reputation because of his affair with Ravi's daughter. The court also agreed with this view that the four acted with the common intention of killing Kuldeep, as Karamvir and Raj had immobolised the victim by holding his arms and legs and Sanjay stopped anyone from coming to the aid of the youth while Ravi stabbed him seven times with a knife. The trial court on June 6, 2011, had awarded life term to all the four after holding them guilty of murder.

While upholding the trial court decision, the high court also said, "Kuldeep perhaps would not have met such a tragic end and these accused persons perhaps would not have suffered severity of punishment of life imprisonment had they acted in a sensible and mature manner with due patience, tolerance and understanding to resolve the things instead of taking the law in their own hands."

Source-http://www.dnaindia.com/delhi/report-failure-of-live-in-relations-a-major-reason-for-increase-in-rape-cases-claims-delhi-high-court-1996651

Why is the divorce rate so high (especially in Western countries) if love marriages work?

Why is the divorce rate so high (especially in Western countries) if love marriages work?



Because divorce-rates are mostly a reflection of equal rights for women and social acceptability of divorce, and not how happy people are in their marriages.




There are happy and unhappy marriages everywhere. The biggest difference is not in this, but in what people do if they find themselves in a unhappy marriage.




In some cultures, it's socially unacceptable to ever get a divorce. Especially divorced women are often in a difficult situation. If they were at home as a housewife while the husband worked, they may have little experience with working and few chances of providing well for themselves financially. It is hardly surprising, under such circumstances, that few seek a divorce.




Instead, they endure. Marriages which are without passion. Without love. Without friendship. Sometimes even without basic respect -- nevertheless stay intact on the surface. One of my Iranian friends has parents who are still married to each other despite the fact that they generally try to avoid being in the same room, because they are on so bad terms with each other -- and they have been for more than a decade. Such a couple would almost certainly divorce in a culture where that was more acceptable.




In western countries, the question is not if the marriage is possible to endure. But instead if you think you will be happier inside or outside the marriage. It is common for married people in the west to divorce despite none of them being abusive, despite no cheating, and sometimes even despite a still functional friendship - because one of them, or both, feel that the marriage is holding them back or not providing everything they want from a partner.




To be honest, I am not certain if people in love-marriages are on the average happier than people in arranged marriages. There's a lot to be said for love, for making your own choice, for chemistry. But there's also quite a lot to be said for making a rational choice guided by things like shared values and background and considering pros and cons in a more rational and less emotional light.




Serial monogamy is pretty acceptable in much of "the west" and as such, you should not necessarily consider all marriages that end in divorce as "failures", if 2 people are in love, and live together happily for 3, 5 or 10 years (but not for life), where is the failure in that ? We don't consider other relationships that last for years but not for life a "failure" so why do so for love ?




If you've got a dear friend that you hang out with for 3, 5 or 10 years before you drift apart and lose contact, do you consider that friendship a "failure" ?
http://www.quora.com/Marriage/Why-is-the-divorce-rate-so-high-especially-in-Western-countries-if-love-marriages-work