LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     29 September 2010

Justice Malimath proposing changes in S. 125 CrPC -Karnataka

On 28th Sep, 2010, chairman of Karnataka Law Commission has recommended to State Govt. to amend S. 125 CrPC among other changes. The significant recommendations are:
 

1. Live in woman to get same status as wife under CrPC 125
2. Husband to declare assets under CrPC 125
3. Read following links for more details available so far:
 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bangalore/Law-commission-offers-divorcees-hope/articleshow/6639186.cms     
 

https://www.deccanherald.com/content/100242/panel-changes-dowry-law.html 
 

I noticed in LCI Forum there are genuine members from Karnataka State and they have in recent past asked very genuine Law questions, hence, if they feel that below protest / recommendation Letter may help making gender neutral maintenance Laws in their State to begin with then they are requested to simply copy and paste the Letter and post them to three respected Public Figures marked there.

---------------------------------------

From: write your name and fill in other details
Name
:
Address:
Email:
Mobile:
Date: 29-09-2010


To,
Justice Shri V Malimath,
Chairman,
Law Commission of Karnataka,

Dear Sir,

Sub: Recommendations by law commission on proposed law amendments

I would like to draw your attention in the matter of recently submitted 12 recommendations by Honourable Chairman of Karnataka Law Commission Mr Malimath to the Karnataka State Government.

Going by the newspaper reports on the recommendations, we would like to give my feedback on these important issues of changes to CrPC 125 as given below:

General process of law making in a democracy

1.      The citizens of India have the duty to be bound by its constitution and laws, and so also have a right to be represented in law making, and getting their opinion heard and considered. I hope that this letter will be taken in same spirit and will not be ignored, for ignoring it will be ignoring the voice of citizens for whose purported benefit the changes to law are being proposed.

2.      I would recommend that the law commission involve the citizens in further proposed law changes. The legal drafting can be left to legal experts, but the common citizens cannot be denied their representation on the excuse that they do not have the legal expertise. Just as not knowing the law is not an excuse for a citizen, so drafting a law without involving citizens should also not be any excuse for lawmakers.

Loopholes and dangers of proposed amendments to CrPC 125

1.      It is mentioned that law commission has proposed these recommendations, but no details are available on the statistics, studies, or research conducted to arrive at the recommendations. The courts in India are burdened with work and do not even provide statistics of court cases in RTI replies based on same reason of lack of resources, so it is a foregone conclusion that no study of CrPC 125 cases settled or pending in courts was done in making these recommendations. It is highly desirable that any recommendations to a particular law like CrPC 125 which has voluminous statistics in terms of court cases past and pending, must be made after careful analysis of such statistics.

2.      Daughters under Hindu Succession Laws are entitled to parent’s property. So there is no legal bias against married Hindu women when it comes to inheriting properties from parents. If a married woman is deserted, then she has legal recourse to parents' property if she has no other source of income left. If that is not considered legally acceptable, then the law commission is effectively creating a presumption that a married woman loses right to parents' property after marriage! So the property of wife's parents must also be declared if the current proposal to declare husband's assets is passed.

3.      The proposal to amend CrPC 125 to make a husband declare assets smacks of bias against men and disempowerment of women; as if women are not owners of assets and property! If this proposal is implemented, then a wife must also be liable to declare assets to be able to institute proceedings under CrPC 125. Otherwise it will create one more bias and presumption in law that a man may want to hide assets to escape maintenance, but a woman will not hide assets to claim unjust maintenance. Kindly note that current provisions of CrPC 125 do not give maintenance to woman if she has deserted her husband without a just cause. The underlying rationale of not creating fissures in family structure on account of small marital issues must not be disturbed by any new changes to CrPC 125.

4.      If a husband is to declare assets, then he should be made to declare liabilities too. It is not just that a husband may have to pay maintenance from assets when he has liabilities to take care of. For example, if a man buys a house on loan then the loan and interest repayment must be deducted to arrive at net assets or liability figure.

5.      Such changes to law could actually worsen women's position in society. Even after Dowry Prohibition Act was passed in 1961, and IPC 498a was passed in 1983, the 'evil' of dowry has not been eliminated. Indeed it is reported by sociologists that dowry has become common in communities where it was not a prevalent custom before. With women being given entitlement on husband's assets, and not enforcing their right on parent's assets, they will be considered even more of a 'burden' by parents, who would wish them to be married off so they can be entitled to husband's property and disentitled (not legally but socially) from parents' property. It would then increase the practice of dowry since the practice of giving daughter's share of parents' wealth as 'dowry' will have one more supporting argument from husband's side to safeguard themselves from any future liability if the wife separates and institutes proceedings for maintenance under CrPC 125.

6.      The practice of declaring and signing list of gifts given during marriage under the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 has never been followed in practice. Has the law commission considered how this particular change in law is proposed to be enforced in practice? Has the law commission considered the total cost of changing law in terms of law enforcement, as proposed by Honourable Law Minister Mr Veerappa Moily recently?

7.      It is a wrong presumption that a proposed law change will only be used in its positive intentions, and will not be misused. The cases of misuse of laws in Indian courts are plenty, and a weak or non-existent enforcing of provisions of perjury and false evidence incentivizes such misuse. As an example in point, the number of arrests made in Delhi under IPC 498a had a sharp drop from 2688 in 2007 to 725 in 2008, as per data from NCRB. This happened after a circular was issued in Delhi that any arrest under IPC 498a must require permission from DCP. The fact that number of arrests dropped dramatically when the number of complaints did not clearly indicates the scope of abuse of powers by various government agencies, the Delhi police in this case. But the other government departments cannot either be given a blanket assumption of honest implementation of proposed changes to laws without bias and corruption. Proposed change to CrPC 125 must be evaluated under this light too.

Feedback for any change to maintenance laws including current proposed changes to CrPC 125

1.      There are plethora of laws which give maintenance to women from husbands. They include CrPC 125, PWDVA, HMA Sec 24/25, HAMA Sec 18 and so on. It is not clear why the law makers are only interested in creating more legal provisions and complexity, and not ensuring that existing laws are enforced properly in a timely manner.

2.      If the wife is to benefit from the assets of the husband then wife also must be made to pay for husband’s liabilities. A wife cannot choose to cherry pick on the assets and benefit from the same. The essence of the Hindu Marriage rites is that the wife is an equal partner of the husband in good times as well as in bad times. The legal system has no right to make the wife into a parasite who lives off the assists of her host, but has no responsibilities if the host has liabilities. This is against the principles of Natural Justice.

3.      By following legal laws and practice in other nations, only property acquired after marriage must be considered for any such proposed asset/liability declaration by husband and wife in any of the maintenance laws. It has simple rationale that it creates incentive for couples to stay in marriage and a disincentive against using marriage as a spring board to acquiring un-earned property in a short time. The principle of moral hazard must be taken care of in all maintenance laws.

4.      The law does not create any incentive to create marriages, and it must not create any incentives for any party to break marriage and family, especially keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, and interests of children in mind.

5.      Marriages with duration less than 10 years should not entitle woman or man to maintenance under any proposed changes. Such a position has been adopted in maintenance laws of other countries, e.g. in Texas state in US.

Yours sincerely,

<tajobsindia>

(Signature)

 

CC.:

1
. Hon’ble Law Minster, Mr. V. Moily, Min. of Law and Justice, New Delhi

2. Honourable Law Minister, Shri S Suresh
Kumar, Ministry for Law & Parliamentary Affairs, #327, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore-560001



Learning

 12 Replies

aflatoon dash (health)     29 September 2010

excellent fantabulous.I am impressed

1 Like

aflatoon dash (health)     29 September 2010

excellent fantabulous.I am impressed

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     29 September 2010

1. Then post it
.

2. Are you not an Indian?


3. If a person is married and has a son and this person is even not effected by maint. Laws then for posterity post such protests if the person loves his son.


4. You all have only this life to change Maint. Laws and from a heavenly watchful eyes we will know how our Son are doing........

5. Till then I am keeping Thank You clicked icon of mine by you in suspended state, anyhow I am nowhere in the list of Ipod contenders for this month so these Thank You's to me are not of any worth ji 

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     29 September 2010

Thanks.


(Guest)

S EX  workers will be in more demand than wives if such changes are introduced. if someone is in livin its by his choice. government interfering too much in personal lives . this justice seems to be too old to understand realities of todays lives.

1 Like

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     29 September 2010

Dabang Lady

Justice Malaimath is regarded as highly respected legal authority in India and has shown light on some of the best wisdom on various subjects in law and I had the chance to meet him in one of the RAKSHAK seminar at SCOPE Complex, Delhi along with Justice Dhingra and commenting upon him is like showing burnt candle to Sun, kindly re-consider your haste comment with study of his papers / recommendations on law reforms and other related subjects.

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     29 September 2010

swatirswatir (learning law)     29 September 2010

why this justice has not proposed that even husband can also file/claim maintenance under CRPC125?

if india wants a gender neutral society then it shld not go for gender biased laws. i am against any kind of gender biased laws

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     29 September 2010

1. Rightly inferenced by you.


2. That is why post above letter to him now !


3. Let the bell be out of the cat :-)


(Guest)

tell me the logic of s125 in livin relationship. if someone is in livin its by his/her own choice  , then couple knows its consequences well.wat is need of interfering in personal lives of ppl.  just becoz u kno him personally is no reson for u to concur with his views. what are ur independent  views taj of india sir on issue of s125 applicability in livin relationship.

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     30 September 2010

Some quick bytes:


First: For live-in there is no Law (penal) provision as such so live-in is not recognised as yet in
India.


Second: Very soon, feminists will say any woman of the society can claim maintenance from any man of the society!


Third: Live-in relationships happen because the two people involved chose not to get married it is as simple a truth as one should digest it sooner than later in evolving cultures. Now how can feminists say they should get equivalent status as marriage? So what is Indian Marriage then going to be like in days to come; like animals road side marriage, I also mean do anyone of you believe in India OR you all have exported your thinkign faculty to USA !


Forth: Tomorrow, feminists shall say even a girl who has a boyfriend has the same rights as a wife? Yes, why not bhai !


Fifth: Day after tomorrow, feminists shall say a girl who has any friend who is a guy can claim maintenance from him be it office co-worker reason being this women spents 8 hrs. of productive labor there na and that guy was also there for 8 hrs.!  I mean what is this matrix ?


Sixth: Two days from now, they shall say any girl can claim maintenance from any guy! I mean here they want to include sisters to brothers is a sister not a girl and is a brother not a guy, com’n, Hon’ble SC taak yehi saab imagination ki batt karo aab bhai longo !


All above are nimbu pani of daily life of feminists who on one hip carry Mahabharata / Ramayana and simultaneously they pull from other hip Labor Act, Bhopal Gas Compensation along with Motor Vehicle Compensation Act etc. etc. and start equating Maint. awarded to wife on such tombstones !. It is these kind of family destroyer utopian dream world nimbu pani folks, who live in self make believe world and say Live-in women should get maint.


Icing they add is that it is fault of a man, as if THAT WOMEN was a bechari cow who was asked to wear rainbow glasses and was chloroformed daily while live-in into lived-in relationship with a man !


Cmon give me a break now will you :-)


Hence I reserve my further independent thoughts for further expressions at appropriate moment. Till then click as many thumps down icon as you folks want if you don’t like my straight honest take……….


PS. (Disclaimer): All you and persons reference are generic and imaginary as live in maint. is imaginary too
J

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     30 September 2010

For the first time I am seeking liberty to rephrase my composition, hope Admin allows it;


Quote
“Hence I reserve my further independent thoughts for further expressions at appropriate moment. Till then click as many thumps down icon as you folks want if you don’t like my straight honest take……….”Unquote


Should be read as now:


Rephrased:
Hence I reserve my further independent thoughts for any more further expressions at appropriate moment of truth. It is so because anyhow I am not going to get a Ipod this month (Sept. '10) and even my live-in dreams of a T - Shirt is also fading profile maintenance memory lane so in kacha - baniyan I am penning these takes literary……….hoping some expert member pushes my T-shirt call to Admin. at eleventh hours


Was that politico-correct re-take only 21 hrs. announcement time left now ? So produce some sharp takes on such desperate need for T-shirt appeals for this genuine needy member
.


BTW:
Dabung lady; Kya cap bhi reward scheme me atta hai to ussi ki call maar leta hun jatey jatey
 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register