SC allows couples to settle marital cruelty cases

SC allows couples to settle marital cruelty cases

ByDhananjay Mahapatra, TNN | Feb 23, 2013, 02.42 AM IST

In a first, the Supreme Court on Friday permitted settling of cases under Section 498A of IPC lodged by a woman against her husband and in-laws for alleged cruelty in her matrimonial home.

NEW DELHI: In a first, the Supreme Court on Friday permitted settling of cases under Section 498A of IPC lodged by a woman against her husband and in-laws for alleged cruelty in her matrimonial home.

Though it was enacted to protect women from harassment and cruelty, there has been judicial recognition of the fact that on several occasions, false complaints under Section 498A were filed to teach the husband and his relatives a lesson as these cases were non-compoundable and bail was difficult to get.

"We feel that though offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC is not compoundable, in appropriate cases, if the parties are willing and if it appears to the criminal court that there exists elements of settlement, it should direct the parties to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation," a bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana P Desai said.

"If there is settlement, the parties will be saved from the trials and tribulations of a criminal case and that will reduce the burden on the courts which will be in the larger public interest," said Justice Desai, who authored the judgment on behalf of the bench.

"During mediation, the parties can either decide to part company on mutually agreed terms or they may decide to patch up and stay together. In either case, for the settlement to come through, the complaint will have to be quashed. In that event, they can approach the high court and get the complaint quashed. If, however, they choose not to settle, they can proceed with the complaint. In this exercise, there is no loss to anyone," the bench said.

The judgment came in a case where a couple separated just two days after marriage as a row between the parents of the bride and groom resulted in a massive ego battle leading to a legal fight that lasted for 10 years.

During the time they were separated, the wife made several false complaints against her husband and his father, including a derogatory complaint that she was asked by her mother-in-law to sleep with her father-in-law. When the court found it to be false, she said it was an attempt to pressurize her husband to take her back.

The bench said, "This statement cannot be explained away by stating that it was made because the wife was anxious to go back to the husband. This is not the way to win the husband back. It is well settled that such statements cause mental cruelty. By sending this complaint, the wife has caused mental cruelty to the husband."

It said the high court erred by ruling that mental cruelty could be caused only if the husband and wife stayed under one roof. "Staying together under the same roof is not a pre-condition for mental cruelty. Spouse can cause mental cruelty by his or her conduct even while he or she is not staying under the same roof," Justice Desai said.

"In a given case, while staying away, a spouse can cause mental cruelty to the other spouse by sending defamatory letters or notices or filing complaints containing indecent allegations or by initiating number of judicial proceedings making the other spouse's life miserable. This is what has happened in this case," she added.

The bench said years of false and frivolous complaints had irretrievably broken down the marriage between the parties. It asked the husband to pay Rs 15 lakh as alimony for grant of divorce.

"Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. But where marriage is beyond repair on account of bitterness created by the acts of the husband or the wife or both, the courts have always taken irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a very weighty circumstance amongst others necessitating severance of marital tie," the court said.

"A marriage which is dead for all purposes cannot be revived by the court's verdict, if the parties are not willing. This is because marriage involves human sentiments and emotions and if they are dried up, there is hardly any chance of their springing back to life on account of artificial reunion created by the court's decree," it added.

dhananjay.mahapatra@timesgroup.com
 
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-allows-couples-to-settle-marital-cruelty-cases/articleshow/18637125.cms?


full text @

http://legalmanthan498adowrymisuse.blogspot.in/2013/02/sc-allows-couples-to-settle-marital.html

http://legalmanthandivorce.blogspot.in/2013/02/sc-allows-couples-to-settle-marital.html

MISUSE of ipc 498a dowry harassment laws as Chiranjeevi's daughter Srija files dowry harassment

Chiranjeevi's daughter Srija files dowry harassment case. Yet another case  of misuse of 498a . Evidently Meenakshi Lekhi, a feminist lawyer promotes its abuse and misuse as she views it as OVERUSE OF 498a 

16 march 11

The issues and dispute are different and do not fall in the ambit of 498a but still these allegations are allowed and given color of dowry harassment to get the matter settled at the unlawfull terms of wife by systematic extortion and blackmailing of husband and his relatives who are hapeless remedyless and are victimised on mere false allegations of the wife.

NOW HERE IS  A CLASSIC CASE WHERE BLATANT AND FLAGRANT MISUSE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS ALLOWED TO SETTLE PERSONAL PROBELEMS/SCORES AND VENDETTA

This case clearly depicts how after LOVE MARRIAGE that was done against the girl’s parents wishes is ruined with interference of girl’s parents who ultimately convince,tutor and pressurise their daughters to get divorce from the SON-IN-LAW they were always opposed to.

And it also exemplifies how mindlessly such girls MISUSE AND ABUSE DOWRY HARASSMENT LAWS to get out of a marriage at their own terms.

HYDERABAD: Police adopted a cautious approach in handling the dowry harassment complaint filed by Chiranjeevi's daughter Srija against her husband and in-laws.

Police said that they were in the process of gathering evidence to substantiate the complaint lodged by Srija.

In her written complaint, Srija alleged that her husband Sirish Bharadwaj along with her mother-in-law Suryamangala had been physically and mentally harassing her for the last few months for money to set up business.

According to police, Srija, in her complaint, said that as the harassment continued, she feared that Sirish might force her to sell away properties registered in her name. "Due to suspicion, she re-registered the properties on her family members name," a Central Crime Station (CCS) official said.

The 22-year-old housewife also alleged that she had sent several e-mails and SMSes to her family members and friends about the harassment. "Srija put up with the torture for a long time, but left for her parents' house a few days ago when Sirish physically assaulted her in an inebriated state," an investigating officer said.

On Tuesday, CCS police asked Srija to submit supporting evidence like property papers, email and SMS details.

According to sources, Sirish was in police custody and his parents were also in touch with them. But they would show his arrest after getting substantial evidence from Srija.

Earlier in the day, DCP DD J Satyanarayana told media personnel that cases were registred against Sirish and his mother under Sections 498-A (Subjecting a married woman to cruelty) and 3 & 4 of the Dowry (Prohibition) Act of IPC.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Police-cautious-in-handling-dowry-harassment-case-of-Chiranjeevis-daughter/articleshow/7714313.cms

Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

Man fighting for harassed husbands fined 1L by Gujarat HC

TNN, Nov 26, 2010, 03.32am IST

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.

 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/Man-fighting-for-harassed-husbands-fined-1L-by-HC/articleshow/6991947.cms#ixzz16KwY9gFj

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 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mysore/Decline-in-values-has-led-to-violence-against-women/articleshow/6990667.cms#ixzz16K5oXxNM

Is the judiciary going soft on murderers and rapists

 

Judges are actually given too much discretion

The judgment given in any case depends on the proceedings of the court and the judge's discretion. The standards adopted in a particular case may differ in the high court and Supreme Court. There are certain guidelines for a death sentence and it must be a 'rarest of the rare' case. Thus, there is no question of whether a judgement is 'right' or 'wrong' . It all depends on how the bench of judges perceive the case based on the submitted proof. The outlook of judges of a bench may also differ. There is no standardisation in the verdict to be pronounced. However, I would like to point out that judges are given too much discretion. In the end, judges base their verdict on the proof put forth after investigations.
-PB Sawant, former judge, Supreme Court of India

Leniency on the part of the Supreme Court is not justified

In our country, a death sentence is pronounced only in the 'rarest of rare' cases. The court makes its decision on the basis of evidence and the investigation carried out, but the punishment should be awarded in such a way that justice actually prevails. The reason that the judges gave for reducing the death sentence of the convict in the Priyadarshini Mattoo case are dubious. There is no justification for such a dreadful crime. It is different in a case where the victim is alive and the accused offers to marry the victim.
While upholding that he was guilty of the crime, the judges cited mitigating circumstances, which included the young age of the accused at the time of the murder and his having married and become a father. These factors cannot reduce the gravity of a crime that was premeditated and executed in the most brutal manner.
This kind of leniency on the part of the Supreme Court is not justified. The verdict in such a case should act as a deterrent to others as well. Leniency would make people feel that anyone can get away with such a gruesome offence. Rape and murder of a victim is a very serious crime. The commutation of the verdict is not justified.
-Kiran Moghe, president, Janwadi Mahila Sanghatana

Has justice been served?

Priyadarshini Mattoo case

A former IPS officer's son, Santosh Kumar Singh, who was convicted of brutally raping and murdering 25-year-old Priyadarshini Mattoo 14 years ago, escaped the death sentence when the Supreme Court set aside the Delhi high court's order and gave him a life term.
The SC said the "horrendous crime" had happened because Santosh's parents were over-indulgent. The judges said many ghastly crimes happen when "an accused belongs to a category with unlimited power or pelf or even more dangerously, a volatile cocktail of the two".
The apex court added that Singh was young at the time of the incident, and after his acquittal by the trial court he got married and became a father, and there was nothing to suggest that he was not capable of reforming.

Pratibha Srikantamurthy

A fast track sessions court convicted cab driver Shiva Kumar to rigorous imprisonment for life for kidnapping, raping and murdering BPO employee Pratibha Srikantamurthy in December 2005.
Pratibha, who joined HP Globalsoft in 2005 after her marriage, went missing on December 13, 2005 after leaving home for her night shift. Her body was found on the outskirts of Bangalore a day later.
The 113-page judgement said, "There was no dominating control over the deceased. She was not a helpless woman," adding the crime was not enormous in nature and not in the "rarest of rare" bracket. The judge said Kumar, who was 22 then, is now 27. He was not a habitual offender and the prosecution had not shown that he had been convicted for crime earlier, he said.

Without harsh punishment, people will not fear the law
In rape-murder cases, the law is not as harsh as it should be. Thus, there is no fear in society when it comes to committing these crimes. Take any rape or criminal case; the time it takes to reach a verdict is very long. When the fast track courts take that much time (five years in Pratibha's case), why do we need them at all? In this way, people will lose faith in fast track courts. They will be dissatisfied with our judicial system if there is no change in the procedures, especially in cases involving atrocities against women. Such soft judgements will obviously have consequences, wherein people will not be afraid of committing crimes against women. Moreover, by commuting a death sentence, you give the accused time to find ways to get free.
Capital punishment is criticised vehemently on moral grounds, so we do not have an option but to replace it. However, if it is stopped, bad elements in society will continue committing such crimes.
-Lata Bhise, advisor, Yashada

The judgement cannot be made on the basis of public opinion
Life imprisonment until death is as bad or may be worse than a death sentence. Capital punishment is not required as long as the guilty is being punished for his crime. In fact, a life term is more severe as the convict has to live with his guilt in isolation.
People expected a death sentence in the Priyadarshini case, but the judgement cannot be based on public opinion. Mob mentality tends to be brutal, so the judiciary should not get influenced by what people think. Every murder is heinous, but the 'rarest of rare' case can be applied only to the most gruesome crimes.
-Ritu Lamba, law student

Such acts go against the norms of humanity and compassion
The Priyadarshini Mattoo case has revived the debate over whether capital punishment should be awarded and if it can deter others from committing such crimes. Our Constitution and statutes recognise capital punishment as a deterrent to heinous crimes. In case of a crime as gruesome and merciless as rape and murder, the convict should certainly be granted a death penalty. Such acts go against the norms of humanity and compassion. Anything less than life imprisonment until death should not be acceptable.
As far as the Supreme Court verdict in this case is concerned, the death sentence should not have been reduced to life imprisonment. Keeping in view the heinousness of the crime, the court should have upheld the previous decision and stood by it.
-Sameer Nargolkar, lawyer

Severity of punishment is not a deterrent to crime
Death penalty must be abolished in India because it is a cruel way of punishing someone. It is surprising that the lower courts are enthusiastic in awarding death sentences. A capital punishment with the noose does not go well in a civilised society. If we call ourselves civilised, we must stop this practice. The severity of punishment does not act as a deterrent to crime. The surety and speedy delivery of punishment is more important. People generally feel that life imprisonment is a soft way of punishing someone. Considering the severity of the crime, courts can prolong the period of imprisonment. In case of Priyadarshini, the accused got a life term till death, which is a severe punishment.
-Ramesh Awasthi, founder, MASUM

Flaws in investigation and filing of cases affect judgement
There are two issues in the trial of rape cases — the time required by the court and the quantum of punishment. Both these clauses must be revisited and given a rethink. Two judges can differ in their judgement because the circumstantial evidence may vary. That is how they may arrive at different conclusions. A judge has to decide on the basis of the evidence placed in front of him. If the investigation done by the police is shabby, it can affect the judgment.
I agree that the way rape-murder cases are handled needs to be debated, but it is wrong to criticise the judges and their judgement. Many issues have to be considered in every case. Moreover, if the judgement is based on the investigation, collection of evidence and the way the case is filed, the judge can only do so much. I would say that investigation agencies are the real culprits. One must be persistent in pointing out the flaws in the investigation process and filing of cases.
-Aroona Nafday, advocate

There is a rise in false rape cases, so a court has to be cautious
One cannot say the law has been soft in both cases. The judges have given their verdict based on circumstantial evidence and the investigation reports. The investigation into a case and collection of evidence are the reason for delayed judgements. A court cannot pronounce a verdict without proper facts and data. Cases get prolonged till judges receive the essential proof.

In a recent report, the Pune police said that 74% of rape cases in 2008-2009 were found to be instances of consensual sex. Moreover, there have been cases in which the accused has been falsely implicated. For example, in the case of the American student of Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in Mumbai last year, the medical report did not confirm rape and the DNA report was negative. The complainant told the doctor she was raped by three men whose names she did not know. However, in the FIR, she accused six men and named them. Then, she claimed that she may have been raped, but that she had fallen unconscious after 1 in the night. On the other hand, phone records show that she was texting and calling all night. Thus, in such a case, circumstances become confusing and the judicial process cannot be hurried. Due to the high number of false rape cases and women-centric laws, the court has to ensure that a person is not falsely implicated.

I am not denying that rapes do not happen and the real culprit has to be punished, however, the case has to follow the required process of investigation before a judgement is given.
-Atit Rajpora, activist, Save Indian Family Foundation

team speak up Rajesh Rao, Disha Kohli & Mallika Rale
GET IN TOUCH: Please email us your views at punespeakup@dnaindia.net,
or call on 020- 39888888 extn 125.

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/epapermain.aspx?queryed=40&querypage=4&eddate=10/13/2010&view=nw

HC quashes FIR against DU professor accusing him of sexual molestation.

HC quashes FIR against DU professor accusing him of sexual molestation

TNN, Oct 5, 2010, 04.25am IST

NEW DELHI: In a relief to Delhi University professor, the Delhi high court has quashed an FIR registered against him accusing him of sexual molestation.

Justice S N Dhingra put an end to the proceedings against the accused, Bidhyut Chakraborty, saying he didn't molest or threaten the victim.

Chakraborty, who was working as an honorary director on deputation in Gandhi Bhawan, was accused of molesting an employee of the Bhawan. Subsequently, the police filed an FIR.

Once the probe got over, a chargesheet was filed in the court which revealed that the investigating officer conducted several inquiries with different staff members of Gandhi Bhawan tea vendors and other witnesses available outside the Bhawan to find out the truth. The IO submitted in the chargesheet that not even one witness was found who could support the allegations levelled by the victim and said no evidence could be found against the professor to warrant his arrest. However, keeping in view the complaint made by the victim, the IO left it to the court to issue summons to Chakraborty if needed.

HC was surprised to note that despite no evidence, the police was reluctant to file a closure report. The court next turned its attention to the inquiry report of Delhi University that had examined the complaint of the woman. It revealed that on the day of the alleged incident, Chakraborty found all employees missing from Gandhi Bhawan even though lunch break had long got over. This infuriated him and he scolded the employees including the complainant, ordering them not to come to office for a month. The IO seconded the inquiry of DU and added that when the victim was being scolded, she kept saying "sorry sir''.

This convinced HC that after being scolded by Chakraborty, the victim levelled the allegation of being molested and granted him the relief.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/HC-quashes-FIR-against-DU-professor/articleshow/6686402.cms#ixzz11xaPwDpN

Cop in dowry case faces court’s wrath

Cop in dowry case faces court’s wrath

Sessions court rules police inspector had falsely implicated a Vile Parle family though he knew they were ‘innocent’; family wants to put past behind them

Sunday, January 04, 2009 at 03:52:58 AM

Madhukar, Nanda and their son Ashish had been arrested after their daughter-in-law Meena committed suicide in 2007

In an alleged dowry death case, a police official has come under the court’s scanner for falsely implicating a family by submitting false evidence. If found guilty, police inspector Pandurang Tangadpalle of Vile Parle police station could face upto three months imprisonment.
“The investigating officer has acted with mala fide intention to book the accused and he fabricated false evidence with the intention that the accused be convicted and sentenced,” a sessions judge observed. He added that the policeman had done so “though he was aware the accused are innocent”.
The court issued a notice under charges of perjury (section 344 of CrPC for misguiding a court by giving false evidence) to Tangadpalle, and acquitted five members of a Vile Parle family of dowry harassment.

“From the conduct of PI Tangadpalle, it is apparent that he was acting as a puppet in the hands of Manohar Verma (the complainant). This is a fit case where the court should take cognisance of the offence of fabricating false evidence,” observed Sessions judge R D Jadhav, while issuing the notice to the officer.

The court observed that Tangadpalle had delayed filing an FIR and had fabricated the worth of valuables the deceased had received during marriage.

Case background
A case of dowry harassment was registered against Ashish Desai, his father Madhukar, mother Nanda and brothers Hemant and Umesh, after Ashish’s wife Meena committed suicide on March 3, 2007.

Based on a complaint by the deceased’s brother Manohar, the police arrested the Desai family. Manohar alleged Meena was harassed mentally and physically for dowry by the Desai family.

But the Desai family argued it had been a love marriage and as Meena’s father was against it, the couple wed in December 2000 only after her father’s demise. The couple had a son who was born three years after the marriage. Defence lawyers argued there had been no demand for dowry.

“The accused did not harass, nor make any demands for money. They never abused, nor beat Meena.” they said. The court while acquitting the family, observed that there was no evidence that the accused had subjected the deceased to cruelty or made any dowry demands.

Therefore there was no evidence they had caused her death or abetted the suicide. When contacted, Tangadpalle remained unavailable for comment.

We want son to move on 
“There would be quarrels between my son and Meena as they disagreed on certain issues but her death was not caused by dowry harassment. Whatever we have faced — mental, physical and social trauma — is our past.

The most difficult part was the trauma my son and grandson faced. We are consulting a psychologist to help my son finally move on in life. He is still under trauma and suffers from guilt pangs. He just wants to live for his son now,” Madhukar Desai said

http://www.mumbaimirror.com/index.aspx?page=article&sectid=2&contentid=20090104200901040352587163655859

NCW –Foot In Mouth syndrome- Action be taken against Shiney Ahuja's maid – Women are LIARS

NCW –Foot In Mouth syndrome- Action be taken against Shiney Ahuja's maid – Initiate Perjury !!

 

Shiney Ahuja innocent !!!

Women are LIARS when it comes to extorting money be it be misuse of special laws

Part 1/2 

 

  Part 2/2

 
 



   

After domestic help who accused the actor of rape did a U-turn in a court, the NCW says hostile victims should not be spared

In trouble? The maid, who had accused actor Shiney Ahuja (inset) of rape, retracted her statement in the Sewri fast track court

After a series of cases of rape victims backpedalling on their statements, the National Commission for Women (NCW) has said that some action must be taken against the ones that turning hostile in rape trials. The resolve comes after the victim in the Shiney Ahuja rape case retracted from her statement in the Sewri fast track court.

When MiD DAY contacted Girija Vyas, the NCW president, she said, "Action should be taken against victims turning hostile in rape cases. Such incidents act against women who are actually seeking justice. We cannot allow anyone to lose faith in the judiciary. We will be in a position to comment more once the judgment in the Shiney Ahuja case is out." 

Earlier, two accused in a rape case were acquitted as the victims turned hostile. Former Shiromani Akali Dal MLA from Dhuri Gaganjit Barnala, was acquitted in February last year, after the victim, who had accused Barnala of raping and injuring her at his residence three years back, revoked her statement in court stating that she fell from a cycle and got injured. 

Similarly, in December 2008, Satish Kapoor, who works with the water works department of IT Park, Chandigarh, was acquitted after his domestic help retracted stating that she never complained about her employer to the police.

The story so far

Actor Shiney Ahuja was accused of rape by his domestic help last year, and was arrested on June 14, 2009. As it turns out, the 20-year old maid confessed in a fast track court that the rape charges were a set up. Ahuja had to spend three months in jail last year. Five witnesses, including the victim, have been examined so far.

The next hearing of the case is September 15.  

The victim

The maid, Smita Jadhav (named changed), came to Mumbai from Roha, a village 120 km from the city, to overcome her family's financial problems. With the help of a cousin who resided at Virar, Smita got a job as a maidservant in Oshiwara. The family was happy to receive financial help from their daughter. But, the happiness did not last long, as Smita alleged her employer   Shiney Ahuja of raping her  last June.

The incident allegedly took place at the actor's Oshiwara flat, when his wife was away in Delhi. Soon after the incident, a traumatised Smita went to her uncle's house in Alibaug. Eventually, she returned to her parents' house in Roha. Sources say that currently Smita's father works with a local NCP leader to support his four daughters and a son.

http://www.mid-day.com/news/2010/sep/090910-shiney-ahuja-rape-case-maid-hostile-witness.htm

….

Shiney Ahuja rape case: Maid can be prosecuted for perjury

Following media reports about the complainant who accused actor Shiney Ahuja of raping her turning hostile, lawyers say she is liable to be prosecuted for perjury.

The victim has made a statement before the magistrate under section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which is admissible in court unless proven involuntary.

The trial is being conducted in-camera before the Sewri fast track court.

In-camera trial refers to a case where the court bars the media from reporting about the case as per section 327 of the CrPC, applicable in sensitive cases like rape.

Advocate Majeed Memon said: “The victim’s statement under oath has been recorded under section 164 of the CrPC at the investigation stage. That would mean two versions on oath from the same witness diagonally opposite. Both can never be true. One is bound to be false. Hence, she is liable for prosecution under perjury.”

In the Best Bakery case related to the 2002 Gujarat communal riots, a fast track court convicted and sentenced eyewitness Zaheera Sheikh and her sister in 2006 for perjury. In this case, she had told the Supreme Court that she was threatened by local politicians and wanted the case to be transferred outside Gujarat. However, before a Mumbai court, she changed her statement and was declared hostile.

While leading defence advocate Sudeep Pasbola agreed that the hostile complainant can be prosecuted, he said it completely depends on her deposition. “She can be prosecuted if there are two divergent statements on oath. But it depends on what she said before the court and how far she has strayed from her section 164 statement. If she can give an explanation for her turnaround, the court could consider her point.”

Police officers, however, claim that their case against Ahuja is watertight, despite the complainant’s alleged retraction from her earlier statement. Deputy commissioner of police (zone IX) KMM Prasanna said the victim’s statement was recorded under section 164 of the CrPC, along with at least four other witnesses.

The officials said that the 20-year-old victim told the witnesses that Ahuja had raped her inside his Oshiwara flat.

The witnesses then reportedly encouraged her to lodge a complaint with the police.

“Apart from this, we also have strong medical evidence against the accused,” Prasanna said. On being asked whether the complainant can be tried under perjury for giving a false complaint, Prassana replied: “The court will decide on it.”

Lawyers, however, are more cynical. Memon said the victim’s deposition before the court will hold more weight than the one before the magistrate. “If there is other satisfactory corroborative evidence before the court, the court could still proceed to hold the accused guilty.”

Pasbola said: “The case might result in an acquittal. The section 164 statement can only be used as substantive evidence and can only be used to contradict her earlier statement.”

http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_shiney-ahuja-rape-case-maid-can-be-prosecuted-for-perjury_1435560

Shiney Ahuja's maid denies he raped her

 

 

 

 

After making it to the national headlines, Shiney Ahuja's maid has told told the fast track court that the actor never raped her. She admitted slapping false charges on the actor on the instructions of the woman who helped her in getting the job with Ahujas.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/embedvideo.cmsmsid=6517552&height=250&width=310&adsid=35627&slotid=156&trackid=153&trackpostid=172

Meanwhile, Shiney Ahuja, who is fighting an alleged rape case hurled at him by his maid servant, has faced a big setback on his professional front.
TOI has learned that the makers of his highly anticipated projected Har Pall (who were contemplating releasing the film soon), that stars Preity Zinta in the lead, have decided to push back the release until the court passes its verdict. With the timeline of when the case will be resolved yet unavailable, it is not good news for the actor who is hoping to come back to the industry and reclaim his ground with this movie as well as Accident in which he is paired opposite Soha Ali Khan.
"With such negative publicity against Shiney still grabbing headlines, the makers of Har Pall are wary of releasing the film. They feel it will get disastrous box office results if they release it now. According to perception, many pundits feel that audiences will reject Shiney's film as he still hasn't been pronounced free of the charges of raping his domestic servant. Shiney's brand name needs to get positive light somehow to resurrect his acting career," says a top trade source on conditions of anonymity.
"For the makers it is important that Shiney gets a verdict in favour of him. They will quickly release the film by riding on the positive wave. If not, they will then plan how they can still release it as lots of money is at stake. They will have to go ahead and promote the film with or without Shiney. The film is completely ready which means the producers have kept their investment locked and that's not good," the source adds. The director of Har Pall, Jahnu Barua, confirms TOI's news and adds, "The situation is such that we have to wait and watch."
PTI adds:
The 20-year-old girl appeared before a court on September 3, and said that she was never raped by Shiney and that she had filed the complaint against the actor at the behest of the woman who had secured her the job of a maid in Ahuja's residence.
"On September 3, the victim identified Shiney in the court and said she used to work at his residence as a domestic help. But when asked about the incident she said it never happened and that she was never raped," public prosecutor Kashinath Dighe said.
Following this, the court declared her hostile. If the court deems fit, she can be punished for perjury, he said. The prosecution will continue presenting other evidence including the statements of 12 other witnesses, forensic reports and other documentary evidence. The next date of hearing has been fixed on September 15.

The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Shiney-never-raped-me-Maid/articleshow/6512247.cms#ixzz0yvuwjUAs

 

Shiney Ahuja's maid denies he raped her

 

Shiney Ahuja's maid denies he raped her

September 8, 2010

A woman who worked as domestic help for actor Shiney Ahuja has denied in court that the actor raped her.The same woman had accused Ahuja of rape in 2009. The actor spent three months in jail. He admitted to having consensual sex with her.

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/shiney-ahujas-maid-denies-he-raped-her/162596?cp

No fish for dinner? Woman goes to cops to get 498a dowry case registration- misuse of dowry law already under Govt SC scanner. Punish the misusers

No fish for dinner? Woman goes to cops to get 498a dowry case registration- misuse of dowry law already under Govt SC scanner. Punish the misusers

MUMBAI: Ego clashes, tiffs and the like are par for the course in any family life where members learn to sidestep or live with the occasional discordant note. Or so we are told. But these days, even minor family spats are being played out at police stations across the city with angry wives, husbands, fathers-in-law, mothers-in-law, aunts and uncles slapping grave sections of the IPC on each other.
In one recent case, the bone of contention threatening to break a marriage was fish. An irate man approached a police station in the western suburbs to file a complaint against his daughter-in-law under the Domestic Violence Act for refusing to prepare fish at home.

An equally angry daughter-in-law then evoked Section 498-A of the IPC claiming she was being harassed for dowry by her in-laws.
"The father liked eating fish, but the daughter-in-law was averse to the smell, and refused to prepare it at home. So he claimed he was being harassed," said a cop who ultimately played counsellor and sent the warring family home after they arrived at a compromise. "There was nothing stopping the father from ordering fish from a restaurant after his daughter-in-law left the house for work. But the situation got out of hand and became an ego tussle, with the father insisting that his daughter-in-law prepare it and serve it to the family."

While the incident is indeed chuckle-worthy, cops are not amused, as this law is meant for women who have suffered genuine abuse in the hands of their husbands or in-laws. "These are grave charges and it is not right that they are being evoked for minor tussles," said a police official.

Take the case of another Mumbai housewife who approached the police demanding they take action against her husband for not taking her out, prohibiting her from drinking alcohol, or gifting her expensive clothes. The police try to resolve minor disputes through counselling sessions. "However, the outcome depends on the people concerned. All we can do is offer suggestions," said a social worker.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/No-fish-for-dinner-Man-goes-to-cops/articleshow/6448525.cms#ixzz0xtbSpzi4

Changes in the dowry law ( IPC 498a ) will shut out frivolous complaints – commoners’ viewpoint

Changes in the dowry law will shut out frivolous complaints

The Supreme Court’s decision to ask the government to reconsider the anti-dowry law — Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code — is welcome (Change dowry law: SC to govt, August 15). It is well-known that most dowry-related

accusations invariably lead to the imprisoning of the husband and his relatives. The draconian law does not have any space for judicial inquiry and relies solely on complaints. It should be withdrawn. There is an urgent need to re-examine other anti-dowry laws too, which are no better. At the same time, one wonders why courts do not put women complainants in jail for fraudulent cases that are filed only to harass husbands. There have been several instances when women have filed the cases, made their husbands and relatives appear before the courts and then have either failed to pursue them or withdrawn the cases later. Imagine the mental and physical torture that husbands have been made to undergo! Why can’t the courts jail the complainants for misleading the police, the judiciary and people?

Devinder Sharma, via email

 

http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/lettertoeditor/Changes-in-the-dowry-law-will-shut-out-frivolous-complaints/Article1-590871.aspx

IBN7 discussion on SC judgment on misuse of 498a, warranting for serious relook of the entire provision by the legislation – True lies of Feminists Ranjana kumari caught on national channel unearthed red handed

IBN7 discussion on SC judgment on misuse of 498a, warranting for serious relook of the entire provision by the legislation – True lies of Feminists Ranjana kumari caught on national channel unearthed red handed

 

PART 1/2

 

 

 

PART 2/2

 

 

 

Full text of SC judgment is available here

http://legalmanthan498adowrymisuse.blogspot.com/2010/08/sc-quash-misuse-of-498a-ipc-govt-to.html

Supreme Court asks Parliament to revisit dowry-related legislation

Supreme Court asks Parliament to revisit dowry-related legislation

The Supreme Court on Friday asked Parliament to revisit the provision relating to cruelty and dowry harassment, pointing out that large number of frivolous complaints are filed and courts are flooded with such matrimonial cases.

A Bench of Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice K.S. Radhakrishnan said “a serious relook of the entire provision is warranted by the legislation.”

It said: “The courts are receiving a large number of cases emanating from section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty).

It is also a matter of common knowledge that exaggerated versions of the incident are reflected in a large number of complaints. The tendency of over implication is also reflected in a very large number of cases.”

Writing the judgment, Justice Bhandari said “The criminal trials lead to immense sufferings for all concerned. Even ultimate acquittal in the trial may also not be able to wipe out the deep scars of suffering of ignominy. Unfortunately a large number of these complaints have not only flooded the courts but also have led to enormous social unrest affecting peace, harmony and happiness of the society.”

Maintaining that it was high time the legislature makes suitable changes to the existing law, the Bench said “It is imperative for the legislature to take into consideration the informed public opinion and the pragmatic realities in consideration and make necessary changes in the relevant provisions of law.”

On the increasing number of matrimonial litigations in the country, it said “All the courts in our country including this court are flooded with matrimonial cases. This clearly demonstrates discontent and unrest in the family life of a large number of people of the society.”

The Judges said “It is a matter of common experience that most of these complaints under section 498-A IPC are filed in the heat of the moment over trivial issues without proper deliberations. We come across a large number of such complaints which are not even bona fide and are filed with oblique motive. At the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine cases of dowry harassment are also a matter of serious concern.”

Cautioning the advocates, the Bench said “The members of the Bar have enormous social responsibility and obligation to ensure that the social fibre of family life is not ruined or demolished. They must ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents should not be reflected in the criminal complaints. Majority of the complaints are filed either on their advice or with their concurrence. They must discharge their duties to the best of their abilities to ensure that social fibre, peace and tranquillity of the society remains intact. The members of the Bar should also ensure that one complaint should not lead to multiple cases. Unfortunately, at the time of filing of the complaint the implications and consequences are not properly visualised by the complainant that such complaint can lead to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the complainant, accused and his close relations.”

In the instant case, the appellants Preeti Gupta, the married sister-in-law, a resident of Surat and brother-in-law Gaurav Poddar challenged the Jharkand High Court order refusing to quash the summons issued by a trial court in Ranchi, in a criminal case filed under Section 498-A by one Manisha Poddar against her husband Kamal Poddar and his relatives, in a matrimonial dispute. Contending that the case had been foisted against them they sought quashing of the impugned judgment and the complaint. The Bench accepting the contentions allowed the appeal and quashed the judgment and the complaint against the appellants.

 

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article571008.ece

also 0n 17 aug 2010 @

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Amend-dowry-law-to-stop-its-misuse-SC-tells-govt/articleshow/6321987.cms

Petitioner fined Rs.30,000 for frivolous suit

Petitioner fined Rs.30,000 for frivolous suit

NEW DELHI – Slapping a fine of Rs.30,000 on a petitioner for a frivolous suit, the Delhi High Court Thursday said such litigation clogs the wheels of justice.

Justice V.B. Gupta hit out at people who file meritless suits and said: “Any litigant, who indulges in mindless litigation and unnecessarily wastes the precious time of the court, should not be spared. He must pay heavy costs for wasting the time of the court.”

“It is well settled that frivolous litigation clogs the wheel of justice, making it difficult for courts to provide easy and speedy justice to genuine litigants. it has also been observed in a large number of cases that meritless litigation should be dealt with a heavy hand,” the court said.

The court passed the order on a plea of a petitioner who approached it 11 years after a trial court passed an order against him. The petitioner pleaded that the trial court had no jurisdiction to pass the order.

Taking strong exception to the plea, Justice Gupta said the objections raised were bogus and frivolous.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Petitioner-fined-Rs-30-000-for-frivolous-suit/Article1-576232.aspx