What is the procedure to punish this culprit?


Mrs. Widow Kumari (aka 498A lady)  filed false dowry complaint against her husband's family.

In her complaint she has stated that her in-laws demanded dowry to her  father and he accepted the dowry demand and paid the dowry during the marriage.

Her father was a Tamilnadu State Government Employee.  As per the state government servants'  conduct rules dowry is prohibited.  What kind of action can be taken against this culprit for violating the code of conduct and how to bring the truth from his mouth?

THE TAMIL NADU GOVERNMENT SERVANTS' CONDUCT RULES, 1973

(Corrected up to 3rd April, 2009)


Personnel & Administrative Reforms (A) Department



http://www.tn.gov.in/acts-rules/pandar/tngsc1973.pdf

3A. (1)

No Government servant shall -
(i) give or take abet the giving or taking of dowry

; or


(ii) demand, directly or indirectly, from the parents or guardian of a bride or bridegroom as the case may be any dowry.



Explanation - For the purposes of this rule, dowry has the same meaning as in the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (Central Act 28 of 1961).



“(2)

Every Government Servant shall after marriage or when he celebrates the marriage of his children, furnish to the Head of Department, a declaration that he has not taken any dowry

. Where the Government Servant gets married, the declaration shall be signed by the Government Servant, the wife or husband, as the case may be, of the Government servant and their parents or guardian.

Where the son or daughter of the Government Servant gets married, the declaration shall be signed by the parties to the marriage and their parents or guardian which shall include the Government servant also”

.



Added vide G.O.Ms.No.150, P&AR(A) Department, dated: 15.09.2006.


Total likes : 2 times

 
Reply   
 
Samaritan

Disposition would depend upon the strength of ADMISSABLE evidence (whether mitigating or aggravating). Further, the way the law is written, although the TN Govt. Servants’ Conduct Rules, 1973 requires a written declaration from the involved parties that Dowry didn’t play any part in the ritual, there seems to be no preclusion against its demand in future, i.e., during the course of marriage. Therefore, this particular statute would lose punitive relevance (IF a post-marriage violation was proved to have had occurred). The only REAL EVIDENCE I would deliberate upon (and verify) is receipts and testimony from credible sources. You have indicated that “Mrs. Widow Kumari (aka 498A lady) filed false dowry complaint against her husband's family”. I take this to mean that the complaint was determined to be frivolous. But, regardless, by filing such a complaint, hasn’t Mrs. Kumary also implicated her father in the crime? Also, unless Mrs. Kumari was to produce damaging evidence to support her accusation, I daresay her “complaint” should be viewed no more seriously than fictitious hearsay; an ambitious attempt to ‘put the squeeze’ on her husband’s family (with the connivance of the Bandits in Uniform): Desi entrepreneurship at its putrid best! Shame! Shame! Under such circumstances, I would surmise the best way to punish THESE culprits would be to overbid the other party and motivate our mercenaries in uniform to shift loyalties.  Good Luck! Have Fun!


Total likes : 1 times

 
Reply   
 


Samaritan

Disposition would depend upon the strength of ADMISSABLE evidence (whether mitigating or aggravating). Further, the way the law is written, although the TN Govt. Servants’ Conduct Rules, 1973 requires a written declaration from the involved parties that Dowry didn’t play any part in the ritual, there seems to be no preclusion against its demand in future, i.e., during the course of marriage. Therefore, this particular statute would lose punitive relevance (IF a post-marriage violation was proved to have had occurred). The only REAL EVIDENCE I would deliberate upon (and verify) is receipts and testimony from credible sources. You have indicated that “Mrs. Widow Kumari (aka 498A lady) filed false dowry complaint against her husband's family”. I take this to mean that the complaint was determined to be frivolous. But, regardless, by filing such a complaint, hasn’t Mrs. Kumary also implicated her father in the crime? Also, unless Mrs. Kumari was to produce damaging evidence to support her accusation, I daresay her “complaint” should be viewed no more seriously than fictitious hearsay; an ambitious attempt to ‘put the squeeze’ on her husband’s family (with the connivance of the Bandits in Uniform): Desi entrepreneurship at its putrid best! Shame! Shame! Under such circumstances, I would surmise the best way to punish THESE culprits would be to overbid the other party and motivate our mercenaries in uniform to shift loyalties.  Good Luck! Have Fun!

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Forensics & Evidence     |    x