LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     13 May 2011

Bridegroom arrested after father demands dowry

New Delhi, May 13 (IANS)

 

A bridegroom landed behind bars after his father allegedly demanded dowry just before the marriage ceremony was to begin, police said.

Avinetra, 25, a resident of Nangloi in west Delhi, was formally engaged to a girl April 16 and their marriage was scheduled Wednesday. 'The bridegroom with 'baratis' arrived at the bride's place at Geeta Colony in East Delhi and exchanged the garland,' said a police officer.

Just before the marriage was about to take place, Avinetra's father Laxmi Narayan demanded Rs.20 lakh cash for a car and a television, alleged the bride's mother Sunita Devi.

'When the bride's family failed to convince Laxmi Narayan, they thrashed Avinetra for being a mute spectator and grabbed both father and son and took them to the Geeta Colony police station at around 4 a.m.,' said the officer.

The bride's family alleged that they had met all the demands from the bridegroom's side before the engagement took place but the latter suddenly asked for dowry.

'After taking all the statements of both the families, we registered a case of dowry and arrested the bridegroom,' said the officer.

 

https://in.news.yahoo.com/bridegroom-arrested-father-demands-dowry-191124617.html



Learning

 45 Replies

Zeeshan (Hidden)     13 May 2011

Isn't there any news in which girl side prove wrong before investigation ? Are all girls "BETI OF HARISHCHAND "?

Is kahani me twist hai.

1)Boy's father ask TV & 20lakh forCar. Means girl's father is not giving TV hence demanded.  TV is generally a thing that even poorest  father give now a days. Means girl's father is so poor he is not capable of giving a mere TV. Instead Boy's father ask TV plus 20 lakh for car ???????????? Direct car of 20 lakh. Nothing in between ? From a man who is not able for giving a mere TV ?

2) Shaadi wala hi din mila tha dahej mangne ke liye ?

3) Geeta colony is place where generally richer people live compare to nangloi.

hema (law officer)     13 May 2011

With kind permission from Roshni B, I share this news item of The Hindu in her thread that shows the plight of some metro women in matrimonial home:

Three of family get death for woman's murder

Jiby Kattakayam

NEW DELHI: A sessions court here has handed out death sentence to the husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of a 32-year-old woman whom they killed in the presence of her three children for demanding transfer of a piece of land to her kids.

In his order, Additional Sessions Judge Dinesh Kumar Sharma of the Saket court noted that the case displayed the mentality of an honour killing where “if a lady raises her voice in the family, the family gets together and does her to death”.

The sentence comes hot on the heels of a Supreme Court observation that “honour killings” fall within the category of “rarest of rare” cases deserving capital punishment.

Holding that the sentence would act as a deterrent, Mr. Sharma said: “It has been held by the Apex Court that honour killings fall within the category of rarest of rarest cases deserving death sentence. I consider that courts while delivering judgments and awarding punishments are required to give a message to society that the mentality of a certain class, that a woman is not to be allowed to raise her voice, has to change. It is time to stamp out these barbaric, feudal practices which are a slur on our nation. In such cases, death penalty is necessary as a deterrent for such outrageous, uncivilised behaviour. A message should go to society that if an innocent woman is killed in such a brutal manner, the gallows await them.”

On October 15, 2007, the victim, Urmila, was beaten with bricks and strangulated by her husband Surender aided by his mother Lakhpati and brother Narender. On October 17, the police were informed about a body lying at a house in Humayunpur village of South Delhi.

On reaching the house, the police noticed foul smell and on opening a diwan, which doubled up as a bed and a cupboard, found the body of Urmila with 14 injuries from head to toe.

Urmila's three children, aged between four and nine years, who were witnesses to the gory crime recorded their statements before a magistrate implicating their father, grandmother and uncle. However, during trial the three children turned hostile, but the judge disregarded this noting that they were “won over” and it was not “difficult to understand why these innocent children” turned hostile.

Referring to the “trust” imposed on in-laws by the arranged marriage system in the country, Mr. Sharma noted: “A father marries off his daughter with the belief that his daughter would be protected by her husband and in-laws. An innocent girl also goes to totally unknown persons under the belief and assumption that she would remain safe and sound there… If such a bride is killed in such a brutal manner by all the in-laws together in furtherance of common intention, what could be more brutal or diabolic? This is not the murder of a woman, this is a murder and assault on the dignity of the entire womanhood.”

5 Like

Zeeshan (Hidden)     13 May 2011

 

feeling sad after reading hema's story. It's unbelieveable that these kind of people exists. Due to these type of people law like 498a & DV are formed & person like me who did nothing got crushed.

Thanks Hema.

1 Like

(Guest)
Originally posted by :Zeeshan Ali
"
Isn't there any news in which girl side prove wrong before investigation ? Are all girls "BETI OF HARISHCHAND "?

Is kahani me twist hai.

1)Boy's father ask TV & 20lakh forCar. Means girl's father is not giving TV hence demanded.  TV is generally a thing that even poorest  father give now a days. Means girl's father is so poor he is not capable of giving a mere TV. Instead Boy's father ask TV plus 20 lakh for car ???????????? Direct car of 20 lakh. Nothing in between ? From a man who is not able for giving a mere TV ?

2) Shaadi wala hi din mila tha dahej mangne ke liye ?

3) Geeta colony is place where generally richer people live compare to nangloi.
"

 

 

Means girl's father is so poor he is not capable of giving a mere TV. Instead Boy's father ask TV plus 20 lakh for car ???????????? Direct car of 20 lakh. Nothing in between ? From a man who is not able for giving a mere TV ?

 

There are costly TVs also in market,priced above Rs.30,000/,of very famous brands.Go to any rich man's house.You will see one in each bedroom of the house.Can a poor man afford such brands?

 

 

2) Shaadi wala hi din mila tha dahej mangne ke liye ?

 

Yes it's common blackmailing done by "larke wale" in many weddings,where they suddenly demand demand on telephone,before bringing the baraat,and sometimes just before the 7th phera,after completeing the 1st 6 pheras.

 

 

Geeta colony is place where generally richer people live compare to nangloi.

So,you admit that this middle class man of Nangloi demanded dowry from a rich family of Geeta Colony

Zeeshan (Hidden)     13 May 2011

 

I mean to say that TV is not a very big deal for residance of geeta colony. 

I can't say anything on other points. I have my openion & you have your's. 

I know one thing . Girl side always blame for asking dowry to get case in there favour in these cases.

Once opon a time in kadkaduma court , delhi. A girl blame her husband & her family for Dv & dowry etc. The girl come to court with her "boyfriend" (note bravery). Husband notice her boyfriend. During proceeding husband slip out of courtroom , grab "boyfriend" & pull him in front of judge. Case is clear & he got bail. JUST BAIL.


(Guest)
Originally posted by :Zeeshan Ali
"  The girl come to court with her "boyfriend" (note bravery). Husband notice her boyfriend. During proceeding husband slip out of courtroom , grab "boyfriend" & pull him in front of judge. Case is clear & he got bail. JUST BAIL. "

 

 

Here I completely agree with your views.Somehow I cannot digest adulterous acts


(Guest)

But are you sure he was a boyfriend,ie,a lover?He might be just a casual friend.

 

Is it your case?

Zeeshan (Hidden)     13 May 2011

 

Ab boyfriend ka pata DNA test se to lagta nahi hai. Wo *** bhi band kamre me karte honge isliye kisi ne dekha bhi nahi.

Casual friend ?

Did you ever ask so many questions to a girl who blame on her in laws for dowry ? Or they are always ,"sati - savitri"? 

 

"Boyfriend" was unable to explain reason for visiting court & husband told about him instead. Remember judge in these cases are first class megistrate. They are highly trained & qualified.

 

Judge ke samne achhe achho ka bathroom nikal jata hai.  

This is not my case. I'll can't take girl & her boyfriend in front of judge but I'll beat both of them.  'Maar maar ke bharta bana deta. Dekha jata jo hota.'

Of course I am capable. Example- I beat my BIL in mediation.  Read my story in my profile.

1 Like

Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech.] (Scientist/Engineer)     26 May 2011

 

Why are people debating on the value of the dowry asked and capacity of the bride’s father to meet the demand?   Do they mean that dowry demand is justified, if the bride’s party can afford it? Or do they think that alleging demand of such a large amount was not probable and that the bride’s party was making false allegations?

In the first place, big or small, demand of dowry is bad enough. And why should they make the demand at such an awkward moment? Is it not blackmailing? If the bride’s party is making false allegation, why should they wait until the arrival of barat and exchange of garlands?

Madam Meenal Bahadur cannot digest adulterous acts. Adultery by whom, man or woman? Under IPC Sec. 497 an adulterous woman will go scot-free.  Not only that! Even the Supreme Court has justified it under Article 15(3) of the Constitution. The said Article says that special provisions can be made for women and children. I know reservation of seats in an Educational Institution can be called a “special provision”. Is freedom for adultery also a “provision”, special or otherwise? Sec 497 is there since 1860, 90 years before our Constitution. It was there in the original draft of Lord Macaulay made in 1835 or so. Such a provision did not exist in English Law.

Zeeshan (Hidden)     26 May 2011

Originally posted by :Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech]
"
 

Why are people debating on the value of the dowry asked and capacity of the bride’s father to meet the demand?   Do they mean that dowry demand is justified, if the bride’s party can afford it? Or do they think that alleging demand of such a large amount was not probable and that the bride’s party was making false allegations?

 
 

 

 

Uncle ji , we are not debating about amount or time. We are debating weather or not ?

I said these are general alligation & seems false. whereas feminist says these are true. Please read first.


(Guest)
Originally posted by :Dr. MPS RAMANI Ph.D.[Tech]
"


Do they mean that dowry demand is justified, if the bride’s party can afford it?

 

It's never justified,whether the bride's dad is rich or poor.

Is it not blackmailing?

 

Already replied in above posts while interacting with Zeeshan.You may check sir.

Madam Meenal Bahadur cannot digest adulterous acts. Adultery by whom, man or woman? Under IPC Sec. 497 an adulterous woman will go scot-free.  Not only that!

 

Adultery both both is unjustified,You may go through all my posts where I have discussed this very aspect at large.

Even the Supreme Court has justified it under Article 15(3) of the Constitution.

 

Don't know much about it.But lawfully it's illegal.Sec. 498A puts it under cruelty.Kindly read the latest judgement where a man was jailed for having live-in relations,despite being married.I have no sympathy for adulterous women also,and also for women who break a married man's home by having affairs with him.Some people vouch for their maintenance here at LCI,but I am totally against it.If I had the powers to formulate laws,I will include the clause of punishing adulterous women as well as those women who break a married man's home.But I am hopeful this will happen in India in future.Just 2 days back I was discussing in LCI whyt men can't be tried for adultery under any IPC Section.And just yesterday I read this judgement by Mumbai HC(link posted below) that a married man having live-in relations can be tried under 498A.Now this is what we call something mystic!

 

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Re-Husbands-illicit-affair-is-Cruelty-u-s-498a-37589.asp

 

 

Regards,

 

Meenal

 

 

 


(Guest)

Meenal u gave me 19 thumbs down today. Can u make it 20 for the sake of efficient record keeping ?


(Guest)

Sure...

 

P.S-I don't like to hurt anyone constantly by giving thumbs down.But I am forced to


(Guest)

Gave you one just now...


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query