Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More


(Guest)

Some Specimens of the Nobel and Learned Profession Part I

Title: Some Specimens of the Nobel and Learned Profession – Part I


Some Specimens of the Nobel and Learned Profession


(In the context of false case booked under Section 498A of IPC)

By

 B.N.GURURAJ, Advocate


This paper (Part I till Part VI) is the sequel to the blog I have written about abuse of Section 498A of IPC, which was originally intended to put the scare of God into the husband and In-laws who harassed the daughters-in-law and their maternal family for dowry and other demands. What this provision has come down to in the hands of unscrupulous married women, wily lawyers and corrupt policemen, I have given a fairly detailed account in that blog. Now, you must know how the matters are complicated by the lawyers who connive with complainant in filing false complaint, not to speak of callous attitude and ineptness of the lawyers who have to defend the accused. I shall give blow by blow account of specific scenes.


In this narration,


CL
stands for Civil Lawyer of the Accused person.

CRL stands for Criminal side Lawyer of the Accused person.

OL stands for opposite side lawyer.



Day of arrest



Typically, the police sent for the parents of the husband and kept them in the police station. The parents were told to get their son to the police station. The implicit message was that they would not be allowed to go home until the son reported to the station.



As an instinctive reaction, the near relations of the husband and parents contacted the CL for guidance in the matter, a person with over four decades standing in the profession. He said he would send the CRL to the police station, though it would take some time for the CRL to reach. He also confidently advised, let the parents go to the police station. Nothing will happen. They will take statement from them and release them. When this word came from a lawyer with over four decades experience in the court rooms, the parents went to the police station with some reassurance that nothing untowrad would happen to them.



At around
7.00 pm, the son reached the police station. Even by 7.30 pm the CRL did not reach the police station. Frantic relatives contacted CL and asked him where is the CRL. Then the CL casually said that I will call him over the phone! During that golden hour, he had done nothing.



In the meantime, a plump woman lawyer in mufti, with a mobile phone stuck to her ears was strutting around in the police station along with a male lackey. A little later, the complainant wife joined her. They were seated in the chamber of the woman police inspector. Then the parents and husband were summoned. The woman lawyer asked “What is the figure you have in mind?”. The husband was baffled not knowing what figure he should think of. I was summoned into the chamber as the near relative of the accused persons. The lawyer spoke again impatiently, “name a figure, the matter will be settled”. Thereafter, some blame game ensued. Again the woman lawyer spoke “decide quickly. No one has time!” as though she were about to catch a flight. All the time, the police inspector paid little attention to the goings on and went busily about her work. Suddenly she barked: “Are you through or not? If not I will arrest these persons!”. I told the woman lawyer “You cannot use police station to force a settlement. This is a civil matter to be decided by the family court, where the divorce petition is pending.” “That is different, this is different. If he does not agree to settle, he will be arrested.” The husband refused to yield. The woman police inspector asked “Who should I arrest”. The complainant wife magnanimously said “don’t arrest my in-laws, but arrest this husband!”. Within next few minutes, the Police Inspector completed the arrest formalities. An arrest memo was given to me within few minutes informing me that the husband had been arrested under Section 498A (dowry harassment), 506 (criminal intimidation) read with Section 34 (common intention) and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. For good measure, this memo stated that since it was too late to produce the accused before the magistrate, the accused would be produced in the court next day. That meant that the husband would spend the night in some police station.



At this stage, which was around
8.00 pm, there was commotion outside the police inspector’s chamber. “How can you arrest a person on the basis of bare complaint? What statements have you taken? Where is the investigation?” That was the CRL, a plump middle aged man in late fifties, barged into the Police Inspector’s chamber and questioned how could she arrest the husband without investigation. The police inspector screamed back hysterically “we don’t care! As soon as we receive a complaint, we are bound to take steps to arrest!” CRL shouted back, “I know your Commissioner. I shall report the matter to him by next evening. I have contact with media. I will expose your malpractices. We will tell court how casually you have acted without investigation, based on stale facts. You will be chastasised (sic) by the courts!”



Amidst this commotion, I introduced myself to the CRL and told him that I was related to the arrested person and also a practicing lawyer. CRL gave me a cavalier look and told me “you people don’t know law! You should not have come here without a lawyer. Now, see what has happened.” I told him rather humbly, “look, we had called CL. He was supposed to have called you at
6.30 pm. But, he called you only after 7.30. In the meantime, the accused persons had no choice but to come here”. “Oh, that CL! What does he know about criminal law!” He asked me to join him to go to next building, where the ACP, the boss of this station would sit. Unfortunately, he was not available. CRL called him over phone and told him of the arrest without investigation. The ACP took some to revert back, with the predictable answer that if we had contacted him before arrest, he could have done something. Now, he was helpless.



Since the station was an all women’s police station, keeping a male prisoner would offend the modesty of police women. Hence, the arrested husband was shifted to another nearby police station, who refused to take him in on jurisdictional ground. Finally, he was taken to another police station. The husband was subjected to a thorough search. All the valuables were collected and given back to the parents who had chased him to this destination station. Parents were told that they could supply some food to the accused, who was to spend the night, until taken back to the all women’s police station.



In the meantime, I spoke to CL and told him of what had happened. He took it very casually. “These things will happen. It can’t be helped. What will the police do? They are not going to kill him! Your person has also made mistakes. He should not have come to
India. He should have abandoned the divorce petition and stayed abroad!” These were the words from the very lawyer, who wanted the accused husband to present himself before the family court, so that evidence and cross-examination could be completed! He did not think that he as the counsel with four decades of experience, had a duty to anticipate such developments and advise the client suitably. It gradually emerged that the CL was clueless about criminal proceedings. He told me “Let the CRL handle the bail matter tomorrow. Tomorrow morning, go to my office, collect a copy of divorce petition along with enclosures and give it to CRL. He will need it for moving bail application.” With that piece of advise, all of us, rather dejectedly, retired for the night, leaving the accused husband to brave it out in the police station along with street thugs, and petty thieves. In the meantime, I had called the CRL and requested him to handle the matter of getting bail for the accused husband. He told me to bring copies of house property deed so as to give surety to the accused, as a condition of bail.



I felt that the CL's attitude was most callous. I have myself been a practising lawyer. I do practise in a field of tax law where the Revenue Officers have the power of arrest. To let a client be arrested is the worst thing a counsel can do. Even if that cannot be stopped, I have beleived that the counsel must do everything within his power to get the client out on bail. In those circumstances, it will be necessary for lawyer to visit the arresting officer or the police and explore the ways and means of securing hte freedom of the client. But, here was lending ear to a lawyer, who did not care to come to police station to talk things over. Worse, he thought nothing of his client getting arrested, inspect of his vast experience in law practising being available. I concluded that after decades of experience, that the lawyers become apathetic to the client's plight. Their pomposity and fee alone become important to them.



Bail application moved



Next morning, after collecting the divorce petition copy from CL’s office, I waited for CRL at the
City Civil Court which also houses the Sessions Courts. CRL had given me clear instructions to contact him after 11 O’clock, which I dutifully did. He told me to join him in the court library, where he was doing case law research. In the meantime, I had found Suresh Nanda case, which had held that except the passport authorities, none, including the courts could seize the passport. I was very anxious that under any circumstance, the husband must not be deprived of his passport, which was indeed passport to his job and freedom. I gave this decision copy to CRL. He was apparently unaware of this decision. He condescended to accept the decision from and told me to locate the citation in the Criminal Law Journal, which I dutifully did. After selecting some decisions, CRL gave it to the library attendant, and told him to get two photocopies each, for which I paid.



We next went to the typing pool. CRL selected a typist with computer and commenced dictation of bail application. The CRL did a fairly articulate and competent job of dictating the bail application, got it printed. I paid the typist. Next we got the application photocopied, for service of one copy to the Assistant Public Prosecutor, without the enclosure of divorce petition. Thereafter, we went out to a lean-to shelter, where a middle aged person sat whose sole job was to stitch the applications, plaints, and petitions for advocates. He expertly did a tidy job and charged a modest sum of Rs.30 for that. Then the CRL asked me whether I would mind walking with him to the magistrates’ court which was about a kilometer away. I did not mind, and we walked together.



In the meantime, the anxious parents, who had spent sleepless night had come to magistrate court complex with photocopies of property documents. The house property was in the mother’s name, who was willing to give surety for bail. In the morning, these people along with their son-in-law had gone to the police station to ensure that the accused husband was provided some breakfast and was reasonably comfortable in the station. By that time, he had been brought back to the all-women’s’ police station.



Now, the CRL saw the photocopies of property documents and asked “where are the originals?” Of course, he hadn’t told that originals were required and these had not been brought. The father rushed back to his house to fetch these originals. The CRL went to the typing pool again and dictated a surety affidavit on behalf of mother declaring willingness to stand as surety for the accused husband. By this time, it was
1.00 p.m., and the father returned with original documents. We got these photocopies, and got the copies and affidavit notarized and were now ready to file the bail application in the court as soon as the accused husband was produced in before the magistrate. But, there was another important detail to be attended. That was about the Assistant Public Prosecutor.



In any criminal proceeding where the State is the complainant, it is represented by the public prosecutor, or assistant public prosecutor. In matters where the offences are bailable, bail is granted as a matter of routine subject to the accused giving personal bond and surety, or security. In non-bailable offences, such as the one under Section 498A, section 437 of the Cr.P.C provides that no court shall grant bail unless the PP has the opportunity to oppose the bail application. Therefore, we had to request the APP in this court to file his objections on the same day, so that the magistrate could consider the objections and release the accused husband on bail. We went to the APP’s office, armed with couple of notes of one thousand.



When the CRL asked the APP for this favour, he, an aging, balding and slimy character proclaimed his uncompromising sterling character: “I have never done it for any one, nor will I do it now!” The persistent requests from me and CRL fell on deaf ears. “How can I do that now, when I have not filed objections on the same day for any other case?” He added, “I don’t want money. My children are earning well. You come and sit in PP’s chair for a day. You will know the heat!”



We came out of his office. The CRL asked some court staff for solution. He was advised: go to so and so, who is an office bearer of advocates’ association. If he puts in a word, APP will definitely agree. The CRL and I went in search of this office bearer. After searching through dozen court halls and the association lounge, we located him. He was of course willing to help and accompanied us to the APP’s office. He told the APP, “Look, two senior counsels are here with a request for small favour. You need not do anything out of the way. Just file the objections today itself”. The APP objected, “you should know, in your own case where a CA was the accused, I did not do it, he went to Judicial Custody for a day. How can you ask me to do it now?”. The office bearer said, “That’s alright. What you did to me is different. Now oblige them!”. He discreetly told us to slip the APP three thousand rupee notes. The APP vehemently protested, but nevertheless accepted the money!



This done, the CRL and I went to the court’s bench clerk though whom the bail application and surety affidavit would be placed before the court. We tipped him suitably and told him of our anxiety to obtain bail on the same day. He rather airily replied, “Don’t you know the practice of this magistrate? None is granted bail on the same day in non-bailable offences. At least for one day, the accused will be sent to JC (judicial custody). Even if the APP files objections, this magistrate won’t consider it the same day. Cases under Section 498A are explosive. If the court hastily grants bail, even the court fears that it might be accused of leaning in favour of the accused!” With that, my heart sank. The accused husband was destined to spend a night and next day in the hell called Parappana Agrahara Central Jail. I gave the bad news to the parents and the accused, who had, by now been brought to the court. I think, I merely added to their misery by announcing this.



In the meantime, CRL was searching in the court’s Pending Branch for the copy of the First Information Report. After a short while, we rushed to me in near panic and told me, “come and see the FIR and complaint! That woman has said all sorts of things against the husband and in-laws.” I read the FIR and complaint which was with the Section head of the Pending Branch. The in-laws and husband had been accused of harassing her for dowry of Rs.2 lakhs to buy immovable property (I wonder where would one get immovable property for this princely sum in Bangalore?), treated her like animal, did not care whether she had food or not, that they physically and mentally tortured her. That they were influential people and could harm her including threat to her life and they had to be proceeded against in accordance with law. In the complaint and FIR, even the parents had been named as accused persons.



The vehemence of language in the complaint and the string of lies shocked me. I knew from personal knowledge that her mother-in-law would deliver food plate to wherever the complainant sat, when she returned home from work. I also knew that the complainant would leave the food standing for long time, thereafter reject it as cold or stale. But that was besides the point. The immediate concern were two fold: one, being accused, the mother could no longer stand as surety for the accused; two, being the accused, the parents ran the risk of being sent to JC, if the court noticed their presence in the court hall. CRL told them, “Go downstairs, and go away wherever you like, until I obtain anticipatory bail for you”. The panicked parents dashed out of the court complex, not to be seen or heard for next two weeks.



Since there was no question of obtaining bail on the same day, I agreed to be the surety for obtaining the bail. I did not have to rush to get the documents, as my surety affidavit would be moved only next afternoon supported by my property documents.



While waiting for our matter to be called, we were entertained by a cross examination by a counsel speaking Kannada with heavy Tamil accent. The issue was same, under section 498A. The complainant wife was in the witness box. The counsel grilled her, a person qualified in law and working for a leading law book publishing house, to expose that though she was earning Rs.40,000 a month, she took Rs.3000 as monthly maintenance allowance from a husband, whose reported annual income was Rs.1.03 lakhs! Eventually, at about 4.50 pm, our matter was called. CRL told the court that he was moving bail application, and submitted the copies of decisions he was relying on for supporting the grant of bail. The APP, for all that Rs.3000 was worth told the court that the accused person’s passport should be seized! There was no question of his obliging us by filing objections then and there. The magistrate routinely asked the accused whether the police had treated him badly. He replied in the negative. Equally routinely, ignoring the CRL’s pleas to grant bail, the magistrate remanded the accused to JC for the day, and posted the matter for next day to consider APP’s objections. The CRL gravely approached the accused husband and told him “tomorrow we will definitely get you out on bail. Be brave and put up with this for a day!”



The CRL made a sad show of proclaiming how bad he felt that the client had been sent to JC. I felt that on that day, he had done his best to ensure that the accused husband could be enlarged on bail. His only shortcoming, I felt, was that when the magistrate ordered bail application and objections to be considered the next day, he had not even objected or protested to it nor insisted that the bail application be considered the same day. Nevertheless, I felt that on that day he had done enough work and running around. Before leaving the court complex, I paid him 10K as retainer for the work to be done. He said, "I feel very bad about accepting this money!" But, he did not refuse to take it either.



The police approached me and asked to provide transport to take the accused husband to Parappana Agrahara Central Jail, failing which, he would be taken there along with criminals. Horrified at that prospect, the brother in law of the accused lent his service by agreeing to take the police and the accused in his car. Couple of more cops also joined the trip. All were amply fed on the way including the accused, as we did not want him to eat jail food at least for that night.



Dejected, and feeling depressed, all of us returned home, thinking of the accused husband, who was destined to spend time on hard cold floor with other under trials, while we were going to sleep in the comfort of warm bed.


Please note: One should read complete Part I till VI to understand the ground zero gravity of such criminal proceedings. Hence the necessasity of reproducing I to VI part series giving complete insight of Nobel and Learned Professionals and are anti – thesis of following Three Parts

Forum Home > Family Law > How to prove Section 498-A charges?


Forum Home > Family Law > What steps should be taken by the complainant to prove the c

 

Forum Home > Family Law > How to prove Section 498-A Offences

 



Learning

 1 Replies


(Guest)

it is very eye opening & touching (true)story. Thank you.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register