SIVANI JI, THESE LAWS WERE MADE TO PROTECT THOSE WOMEN WHO NEEDED THEM REALLY. WIDESPREAD RAMPANT MISUSE OF THSE LAWS BY GIRLS TO EXTRACT MONEY
AND TO "SO CALLED PROTECT THEIR MARRIAGE BY ANY MEANS" HAS MADE EVEN REAL CASES LOOK LIKE SUSPECT.
MY APPEAL TO PARLIAMENT AND LEGAL FRATERNITY IS TO FRAME THSE LAWS IN SUCH A MANNER THAT THOSE MAKING FALSE ALLEGATIONS OF CRIMINAL NATURE IN CIVIL OR CRIMINAL CASES
OF MATRIMONY SHOULD GET SAME PUNISHMENT WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN AWARDED TO OPPOSITE PARTY IN CASE THEY WERE PROVED ON OPPOSITE PARTY. ONLY THEN THESE FALSE CASES CAN BE STOPPED.
Here in this thread personal interests are overriding / prevailing over the public Interest.Women are solely held responsible for the rising divorce cases, but the fact is no one wishes to recognize their genuine Independence, liberty and rights. Even some objects the HSA (amendment of Succession Act) 2005 which has made them equal sharer even in ancestral property. There are so many brothers who do not want to give share to their sisters in property. It seems that they are either animal or from alien world landed up on the earth. We forget that they too are daughters and sisters of the same society in which we are living.
We all r aware of court procedure, and with prevailing situation misuses are there, as every law is being misused. It is not only the women rather men too are taking the advantages of the loopholes. Everyone wants a law as per their will and whims or suits them most.
In spite of horrible experience why men go for another/second marriage? Why they are dying to get married? Even some have made this business to earn money. They always want to be in advantageous position. Keep no surrendering attitude.
Before marriage the parents of groom shows that they are very rich, owns so many houses, the boy earns in six figures or seven figures, we r no way inferior to TATA or BIRLA. But after divorce, on question of maintenance, men feel proud to drag their wives to court as they are most powerful or influential people. While deciding maintenance some takes plea that she/wife is earning more than me so it is me who is eligible for maintenance, without any shame, some says the boy is unemployed and we a family of beggars eats only one time from where we get money for maintenance, some asks do I have to pay maintenance to children also. It seems that they are only her children and it is her duty to maintain them and for that also they fight legal battle. Had court and law been not there, voluntarily no one would give any maintenance either to their wives or their children. They do not feel shame on showing their ego and might on their own wife and children and abandon their own blood. Just use them as much as possible, and after that throw them to the road. Neither they want to follow the legislative law nor want to follow the customs.When their sisters and daughter meet the same fate, then everybody praises 498A, DV acts etc.
These acts not being misused rather being used, but unfortunately only few are able to use them due to complicated court procedures.
Matrimonial deaths must be considered as rarest of rare cases, and mandatory capital punishment must be given to the culprits and all matrimonial laws must be enforced strictly, so that not only before marriage they think twice, but after marriage also people do not dare to harass their wives.
An ideal wife is any woman who has an ideal husband.Booth Tarkington
Marriage is that relation between man and woman in which the independence is equal, the dependence mutual, and the obligation reciprocal. Louis K. Anspacher
My wife has been my closest friend, my closest advisor. And ... she's not somebody who looks to the limelight, or even is wild about me being in politics. And that's a good reality check on me. When I go home, she wants me to be a good father and a good husband. And everything else is secondary to that.Barack Obama
Someone asked me why women don't gamble as much as men do, and I gave the commonsensical reply that we don't have as much money. That was a true and incomplete answer. In fact, women's total instinct for gambling is satisfied by marriage.Gloria Steinem
Trust me that as I ignore all law to help the slave, so will I ignore it all to protect an enslaved woman. Susan B. Anthony
It is obvious and off course, I do not have any knowledge of Law, as I do not belong to this field. But for illiterate people like me and others Hon. Justice Pradeep Nandrajog of Delhi HC has described/observed the definition of Law, which is below
“Whatsoever and howsoever may be the theories of law, the common man understands law by instinct. His instinct guides him that whatever is rational and fair is lawful and anything which is irrational or oppressive is unlawful. But, more often than not, law is discovered in a court room through forensic battles fought at length by legal luminaries. On many an occasion, after hearing arguments, a Judge goes into legal transcendental meditations to unfathom the niceties of the law.”
Any way thanks to everyone who have expressed shared their views.
Is it u who has drafted the constitution and laws of America, Europe and Singapore etc?
1 Like
(Guest)
@ Ashutosh
NO SIR, I was not even probably born when your kind que. asked matters were enacted by respecitve Parliament otherwise and / or however;
1. I have desire to be one of the party in modifying / sending comments / re-drafting entire DV Act, 2005 for which I was the very first person from general public to send my detailed comments / my detailed observations / illustration with case laws of some 140 pages to Shri Mahesh Tiwari, Joint Director, Rajya Sabha Secretariat, Room No. 528 A, Parliament House Annexe, New Delhi-110001 based on Parliament Standing Committe, Rajya Sabhacall for general Indian public comments / suggestion on DV Act, 2005 improvement which was pan India News Paper Advertised if you are aware of the same I am not sure of at this moment.
2. My comments / suggestions on Domestic Violence Act, 2005 various Sections / its Rules that I sent my comments based on call from Parliament Standing Committee are reproduced as PWDVA Interpreted Part 1 and Part II in this very FAMILY FORUM previous posts by me during this week and if you like you may rebutt your comments parawise there on my analysis of a Family Law publically please and I will for sure will respect / accommodate them.
Lastly, I apologise publically here for making a hurried comment to you as in Page 4 Post made 22 July 2010, 01:54 which resulted in your abv. bold rejoinder post to me and if that (apology) helps in cooling things of from the title of this particular post then kindly accept my apology afterall I per se is a human being.
Now, that my apology to you is interactive public document here, shall we adjust each other thoughts in each others good books now should we ! :-)
Rgds.
PS.: I also read some case laws sometimes and particularly the below paras might remove the cloud of the this controversial title post which started with a good note but then turned personal may be !
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI,
CRL. R 462/2002
DATE OF DECISION: May 19, 2003,
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.D. KAPOOR
23. These provisions were though made with good intentions but the implementation has left a very bad taste and the move has been counter productive. There is a growing tendency amongst the women which is further perpetuated by their parents and relatives to rope in each and every relative- including minors and even school going kids nearer or distant relatives and in some cases against every person of the family of the husband whether living away or in other town or abroad and married, unmarried sistes, sister-in-laws, unmarried brothers, married uncles and in some cases grand-parents or as many as 10 to 15 or even more relatives of the husband. Once a complaint is lodged under Sections 498A/406 IPC whether there are vague, unspecific or exaggerated allegations or there is no evidence of any physical or mental harm or injury inflicted upon woman that is likely to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health, it comes as an easy tool in the hands of Police and agencies like Crime Against Women Cell to hound them with the threat of arrest making them run here and there and force them to hide at their friends or relatives houses till they get anticipatory bail as the offence has been made cognizable and non-bailable. Thousands of such complaints and cases are pending and are being lodged day in and day out.
24. These provisions have resulted into large number of divorce cases as when one member of the family is arrested and sent to jail without any immediate reprieve of bail, the chances of salvaging or surviving the marriage recede into background and marriage for all practical purposes becomes dead. Result is that major bulk of the marriages die in their infancy, several others in few years. The marriage ends as soon as a complaint is lodged and the cognizance is taken by the police.
I recently participated in a TV discussion on why prostitution is on the rise in the country. I shared the panel with a closet feminist and a radical feminist, both of whom were of the opinion that prostitution was better than marriage since the house is unsafe for a woman, and she would at least get paid for her services if she were a prostitute.
I returned home thinking about their wise utterances and went to bed discussing the same with my husband.
I said, "For decades, feminists have claimed that one out of three women is unsafe in her own house. They have told us horrendous tales about how it was daily grind for men in the country to abuse, assault, set afire and murder their wives. They lobbied for laws which would facilitate a woman breaking her shackles and barging out of the "tyrannical household" or throwing her alleged oppressors out, whichever is convenient. They ensured that every woman who had a problem "clearly understood" that all her problems were because of men, marriage and the household."
"By the same token," I continued, "feminists have also been shouting off of rooftops that streets are terribly unsafe for women. They claim that everyday nine out of ten women are subject to manhandling, rape, s*xual assault, acid attacks and what not. While they believe that, ideally, a woman should able to walk safely on the street at midnight, they are constantly scaring themselves and the rest of us in the society about how women are unsafe on the street even during the day."
"What then, is the solution for women? Where do they go? What can they do?" I wondered loudly.
All of a sudden my husband had an epiphany and said, "A WHOREHOUSE!"
"YES," I agreed, "This is brilliant! It is neither the house nor the street. It is something in between – the utopia that my feminist friends on TV spoke so highly of. They have to be right. That's where they think our women would be safest, well paid and properly fed, and that's why prostitution, with the more fashionable label of `commercial s*x', is on the rise."
I then thought of how far we have come thanks to the feminist movement from pre-independence days.
We had a time when prostitution was a recognized profession and we had the Devadasi system. The system was severely condemned by communists as the handmaid of patriarchy. Their unrelenting crusade against the oldest profession resulted in a legislation for the "prevention of immoral trafficking" in 1956.
While this "prohibitive" legislation decriminalized prostitution, a few decades later, the Government went a step ahead and tacitly legalized commercial s*x and s*x tourism, recognizing how it can financially empower women and thereby boost the economy.
Today, we are at a point where we are talking about prostitute rights. While we have women's rights champions like Brinda Karat who proclaim that "Society should have no right to control what women wear or do", we have others who say, "If you respect a woman's right to say "no" to s*x, you should also respect her right to say "yes" to s*x."
Simultaneously, all heteros*xual relationships have been prostitutionalized so that a woman can claim compensation for all s*xual or non-s*xual, real or imaginary interactions at any time during or after the relationship.
A woman who chooses her hearth and home is not left behind either. She is tagged with the honorary title of "prostitute" as feminists believe that she is unaware that she is only trading s*x for social and financial security, and they will not take "no" for an answer.
We surely have come a long way, baby!
While I was still marvelling at this astounding progress, I saw a news item which said that the recent Government Census clubbed housewives, prostitutes and beggars into a group. What a timely gesture by the Government!
While housewives have already been clubbed with prostitutes, would it not be unfair to ignore the scores of women who have taken to a glorified form of begging by standing before the Courts of Law for maintenance and alimony from their estranged husbands?
Feminists have not only taught women to shun all the age-old encumbrances imposed by marriage and family but also to shed all inhibitions associated with parasitic living. Accordingly, there is no trace of shame in these modern liberated women, but it is with a sense of pride and entitlement that they artfully exact money, thus claiming their rightful inclusion by the Government in the club.
The feminists have reduced housewives into prostitutes and beggars long ago. The Government has just made it official by grouping them in the Census.
Why, then, is the Supreme Court cross about it? Beats me!
wot is it u r trying to say in ur last post???i guess u havent understood the message i m trying to give thru my title...
whether its the govt,feminists,husbands,inlaws or whoever..............the essence of my message is the same
justice for a woman is v.hard in our country....only a few lucky ones get it..........and then the entire womanfolk is labelled as a family breaker
one thing i wana ask all men/women who think women shud not goto courts...
all of u,especially hindus wud be having high regards for Bhagvad Geeta
when draupadi was stripped naked,why was lord krishna supportive of arjun that he must support his wife..........infact he supported draupadi also.....why did he not say to draupadi"just be quiet and do not seek justice"
similarly wen duryodhana tuk away all his property,why did krishna support him in the battle and stated that its not the fight for property but the fight b/w gud n evil,ie, fight for one's rights........
till date we all regards bhagvada geeta to be the most sacred book of hindus......
however wen a woman goes to court after marriage after getting fed up and being thrown out of marimonial home which is her right and seeks alimony as she is unsure if she will get married again,all the geeta readers here will call her act of seeking justice as some revenge
why this hypocrisy in indian society wen our own gods have insisted on seeking justice?
lord rama abandoned sita since she stayed in ravana's compound for so long,still we pray to him as a god.....wen such people are regarded as god,wot to say of today's men?and sita is considered "devi" as she gave her agni pariksha but never revolted....lol!
lastly we raise a hue and cry that wives are taking undue advantage of this law........and poor mother inlaws n sister inlaws are suffering...
if u hv 4gotten,lemme remind that this law also protects mother inlaws andd sister inlaws,ie,men's sisters who are abused by sons/brothers..so its not just benefitting wives....
(Guest)
AISWARYA JI , GOD WAS FOR TRUTH. IF A WOMEN WANTS TO SEEK JUSTICE SHE SHOULD NOT BE MAKING FALSE ALLEGATIONS OF DOWRY AND VIOLENCE. TATS WAT EVERYONE WANTS. IF A WOMEN SEEKS JUSTICE BY JUST MEANS ITS HER BIRTHRIGHT. PROBLEM IS MIXING OF MATRIMONIAL LAWS WITH FALSE ALLEGATIONS OF CRIMINAL NATURE.
REGARDS
3 Like
(Guest)
@ Aishwarya
I will give you my say to your reply post in full but before that few clarification I like to have to understand your thoughts better;
First I like to know what you mean by your para 3 sentence and I quote;
“justice for a woman is v.hard in our country....only a few lucky ones get it..........and then the entire woman folk is labeled as a family breaker”
Que. 1: I am more interested to know what you mean by few lucky ones here?
Que. 2: I am also interested to know from what stats or from what collective experience you say some women are lucky and rest or unlucky?
Just place a concise answer related to above sentence and let us not mix up with other thoughts and I will promptly reply to this para first then colelctively other paras if I don't ask any more questiosn to you.
Rgds.
PS.: I still say your post subject is good but at the end of board no one side will emerge satisfied with these arm chair pow-wow bze both sides are sufferers in their own respective ways when a marriage breaks down some come out quickly and for some it takes time.
WOMEN GETTING ZENDER BASED (BIASED(?)) ADVANTAGE SINCE THE ADOPTION OF ART 15 (3) OF THE COI AS FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT.
THIS SPECIAL PROVISION WAS TOLOURABLE AS THIS BENEFIT AWARDED TO ALL WOMEN IN GENERAL.
BUT 498A MAKES IT UNTOURABLE AS THE BENEFIT GIVEN TO A SECTION OF WOMEN (IE WIFE) NOT ALL OR WHOLE OF THE WOMEN. THE WORST THINGH IS THIS THAT THE LAW CAN BE USED, BY A SECTION OF WOMEN AGAINST OTHER SECTION OF WOMEN IN THE NAME OF MARRIAGE.
COI ART 15. PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS OF RELIGION, RACE, CASTE, SEX OR PLACE OF BIRTH.—
(1) THE STATE SHALL NOT DISCRIMINATEAGAINST ANY CITIZEN ON GROUNDS ONLY OF RELIGION, RACE, CASTE, SEX, PLACE OF BIRTH OR ANY OF THEM.
(3) NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE SHALL PREVENT THE STATE FROM MAKING ANY SPECIAL PROVISION FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN.
HERE IT IS REMARKABLE THAT THE SPECIAL PROVISION FOR WOMEN IS FOR ALL WOMEN NOT A SECTION OF WOMEN (IE WIFE) ON THE BASIS OF MARRIAGE. MARRIAGE HAS NO CONSTITUTIONAL SANCTION AS A DEVICE OF DISCRIMINATION.
COI ART 13 (2) - THE STATE SHALL NOT MAKE ANY LAW WHICH TAKES AWAY OR ABRIDGES THE RIGHTS CONFERRED BY THIS PART AND ANY LAW MADE IN CONTRAVENTION OF THIS CLAUSE SHALL, TO THE EXTENT OF THE CONTRAVENTION, BE VOID.
THAT’S WHY IT IS BIASED LAW, INCONSISTENT AND IN DEROGATION WITH FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS.
THEREFORE SEC 498A OF IPC IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
1 Like
(Guest)
@ arup
i dint say that 498A benefits all women.i meant DV act is also for sisters,mothers,etc......got it??
Trouble Logging in? Try following the given steps -
1. Visit your inbox to find a confirmation mail from LAWyersClubIndia.
2. Click on the confirmation link and confirm your signup
