Rajesh Kumar (Advocate) 07 June 2008
Sam (LAW STUDENT) 07 June 2008
Oh god! I ve known this! Why we would give so much freedom to women's! They r better slaves!
J. P. Shah (RTI & CONSUMER ACTIVIST) 07 June 2008
You have precisely pointed to the legal reality. By excessively pro-women laws and their misuse on the drop of the hat, govt is destabilizing institution of marriage. India will have unmarried 'couples' [contract marriage type] and population of illegal children. We are heading towards serious social problems. Now males would be committing suicides to escape harassment of wife and inlaws. Laws need to be balanced. Govt is trying to solve all problems through legislation only and creating more problems.
Rajesh Kumar (Advocate) 08 June 2008
It is not generalisations- it is a reality. A sad reality which one understand only when he or his relative faces the music of marriage.
Laws are there to examine suicide by woman- Section 304A of IPC, Section 113A of Indian Evidence Act. Rate of suicide is more than twice in men than women. Many of the married man commit suicide due to harassment by their wives- through comments like
1.You dont earn much.
2.You cant keep your parents with you.
3.I will meet my friend (euphemistic name of lover).
4.Force your parents to transfer this matromonial home in my name.
5.Man's mother should work like a servant in the house. etc.etc.
And there is no law to check such abatement of suicide.
If the husband speaks, he is sent to jail on the false charge of dowry. He looses is livelihood, reputation. His vioce is not heard or heeded in court. Police get a case to extort money. Sadist woman constable get a victim to torture.
If man has not suicided early on wife abatement, he will suicide now, after his tryst with law.
Men are weak. Men cannot fight for their honour. Men cannot force the judiciary to change its prejudice and also hear the grievance of men. Men cannot force legislature to think beyond votes and make just laws. Men cannot force police to be impartial investigator.
At least men can refuse to marry.
jatinder prashar (advocate) 08 June 2008
SIR ,i agree to you that most of cases filed under section 498-A ,406 IPC and the latest right given to woman under the new law that is proctection of woman from domestic voilenc.BUT in my practical kowlage in most of the cases the marriage is solemalize with out instestigating about the family back ground , the domanence of female in the decision of the house hold mater ,marriage matter the education of the girl. and the most importance factor is that the person who prepare the matter is advocate how makes the fales storie to implicate the male and his relative .after this the role of police is aslo the it a matter conserning woman so the challan has to be filled even though they have the knowlage that the matter is wrong
Manish Singh (Advocate) 09 June 2008
ya, we men should fight against it but the basic hurdle is "HOW". we can not file any PIL against this nor these laws are unconstitutional, so wat remedies we have got left now with us?
I suppose we need to thik extensively on this matter and I wish to thank respected Mr. Rajesh to come up with this issue at this front. we should be consisdered about this issue since we really dont get any option left once we get entrapped in these kind of cases.
please suggest how to move on?
Santosh Kumar Dhondekar (LEGAL OFFICER ) 09 June 2008
We should generalise such cases Mr. Rajesh as many things happen in our country of such kind wherein either s*x would be blaming the other one and which also includes mixture made by our brother Advocates including parties and police people. But, I agree with Mr. Manish as he is giving a call to all of our brother Advocates, to find out a remedy for men who entrapped or deceived in such kind of cases. More particularly, in such kind of cases, police people are taken care off at first coz they would be ill treating men by using filthy language, through they don't have any right.
But, I request all the members of LAWYERSCLUB INDIA and all the brother Advocates in India, please try put some efforts to find the remedy for the issue, which Mr. Rajesh and Mr. Manish called for.
Rajesh Kumar (Advocate) 09 June 2008
The issue cannot be settled by mere talking. Direct action is required. How can you take a direct action against women- gandhian way- refuse to cooperate- refuse to marry.
You can proceed further- refuse to work with women too. Charges of s*xual harassment at work places is also getting dangerous.
I advocate refuse to cooperate, because the women of today knows about abuses of these laws, and do not condemn it. You can find even on lawyersclub, when such topic is discussed no women member respond or say anything about abuses of these laws. How can you cooperate with some gender who does not want to discuss.
The way they are cooperating is obvious in the views of women organisation. In abuse of Section 498A men suffers, and also women suffered- mother, sister of husband. So when women organisation demanded Domestic Violence Act, they specificaly demanded a provision that complaint cannot be filed against a women member. They knew this law will be misused, hence advocated the Section which bars the proceeding against women member. They want misuse of law against men specifically. For such feminist organisations- it is a war- war between s*xes. Ant it is not about dowry- it is about property, power- it is about usurpation of fruits of man's labour. Earlier women did through love- now they are doing it with the force of law.
The earlier men understand the nature of this war- the better for them.
Manish Singh (Advocate) 10 June 2008
But sir, it s practically impossible to do away with females.
we can not walk on without females.. we need to look into and explore some other options to oppose.
Rajesh Kumar (Advocate) 10 June 2008
Finally it appears that a women has spoken. Not on the issue- a very personal question. I dont mind the personal nature of the question- i deprecate it for it is irrelevant to the issue.
A man be married and having the same view or opposite view. Marriage, for most of the man is like conforming to a social custom. I may or may not have conformed to that social custom- my personal experience is irrlevant.
But it is relevant in one aspect- "why do i think in the way i think". I will tell you a story. There was an indian advocate- trained in England- wearing english clothes- always wanting to travel first class like english gentlemen. Once he was thrown out a train compartment. Out of this experience, Gandhi was born in that english lawyer.
A man is what his experiences make him. And when there are many men having similar experiences- revolution is born. The defective legislations like 498A, Domestic Violence Act etc., coupled with unreasonable administration of these laws, along with fundamental nature of women (scriptures sometimes uses derogatory terms like "striyacharitra") is materials for revolution. Give it a direction- and it will blow away the injustice. I am just trying to give such feeling of injustice a direction.
To answer your question, i am Single, planned not to marry. I respect women a lot, for their love and care. In fact, for my views i have more women supporters than men.
Gandhi ji had many english followers in their struggle for freedom against english rules.
Romeshwari (Lawyer) 10 June 2008
Sir, my only argument was that a person who is married or going to marry in a shorter while is giving suggestion to the people to be away from womens. The one who doesnt belief in his own logic and philosphies is trying to create variations in the mindset of others.
Now let me tell you why you think like this. The only reason is that you are a lawyer and you often face this type of cases. But truly speaking as per my experience being a lawyer (must be very limited) but ha can differentiate as to what is the truth.
Even as per logic and other aspects - 'MAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN MORE GREEDY THAN WOMEN'.
U must be very much aware about the job of the lawyers. Only to deny the truth.
n 1 thing more a male has replied to your comments. This doesnt make any difference, i believe.
This comment may be totally unprofessional.
arunprakaash.m. (advocate) 10 June 2008
in india marriage has been recoganised as a social institution. there may be misunderstanding between spouses. neverthless institution of marriage ceased to exist. this is india. we have tolence to accept all those nonsense we encounter daily in our life.