LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
The Indian Constitution Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Hemant Agarwal (ha21@rediffmail.com Mumbai : 9820174108)     25 October 2010

Women Murderers in country

State has most women murderers in country
(Times of India, Mumbai edition, 25 October, 2010 Page no. 01)


Mumbai: Backed into a corner by an apathetic society weighing heavily in favour of men, an increasing number of women in Maharashtra are resorting to the heinous recourse of murder. Last year alone, more than 650 women were arrested across the state for killing their husbands or lovers, children or others. This figure is the highest in the country, and nearly 48% more than second-placed Andhra Pradesh.


In most cases, police say, the women were first-time offenders and committed the crime either out of betrayal or exploitation, or in the throes of poverty and homelessness. “A woman commits homicide either due to extreme isolation and deprivation due to her husband’s extramarital affair, or her own involvement with another man,’’ said joint commissioner of police (crime) Himanshu Roy. “Almost 99% of them are first-time criminals.’’


Crime in India’ reports compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau show that the number of women arrested for various criminal activities in India in 2003 was 1,51,675; by 2007, it rose to 1,54,635. “The nature of crimes committed by them too is witnessing a sea change. From softer crimes like drug trafficking and prostitution to heinous acts like murder: 3,543 women were arrested for murder in 2005 and 3,812 in 2007. That is an increase from 5.4% to 6%,’’ an NCRB report says.


In Maharashtra, the figure has grown from 576 in 2005 to 652 in 2009 (the numbers crested in 2007, when a record 711 women were arrested for homicide).


33 women held in Mumbai for killings in 2009


Mumbai: The trend of women resorting to murder has been increasing in many states across the nation, including in Tamil Nadu, Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Bihar and Punjab.   In Andhra Pradesh, though, the numbers have fallen from 458 in 2005 to 442 in 2009. Incongruously, the country’s crime capital, Delhi, has always stayed close to the bottom of the ignominious list. In 2005, 40 women were arrested for murder, while last year, the figure was just 53.


Closer home, in Mumbai, 2008 was the worst year, with 38 women being put under arrest for murder; last year, it was 33. Salma Shaikh (name changed) was one of them.


 A 23-year-old resident of Bharat Nagar in Bandra (E), Shaikh was attacked with a knife and raped by a cousin of her husband in the wee hours of August 14 last year. Minutes later, Shaikh stabbed him to death with the same knife.


The incident occurred around 3.00 am. While Shaikh’s husband was in a drunken slumber, 29-yearold Mohammed Ansari forcibly entered their house and dragged Shaikh out at knifepoint.


In her statement to the police, Shaikh said that Ansari slashed her neck and punched and pushed her into a shanty. When she refused to undress, he knifed her in the abdomen and raped her. After the act, Ansari threatened to kill her. “A traumatized Shaikh picked up the knife lying on the floor, grabbed him by his hair and slit his throat, killing him instantly,’’ said the police. The case is pending in court.


In another case, 30-yearold Sunita Waghmare killed Devidas Ghodmare, 32, who repeatedly threatened to sell her into prostitution. Residents of a chawl in Nalasopara, the two were playing a card game called ‘Do Patti’—in which players are blindfolded and tied up-—when Waghmare bludgeoned Ghodmare with iron rods collected from construction sites. She ensured he was dead by driving a knife into his heart.


Jalinder Khandagale, assistant commissioner of police (Trombay division), said that women committing murder is nothing new. “In 1983, when I was posted as a sub-inspector at Kapurbawdi police station in Thane, a case of murder was solved in which a woman was accused of killing her husband because she suspected him of having an affair,’’ Khandagale said.
 



Learning

 49 Replies

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     25 October 2010

can i ask how this article is related to family laws,that u posted it in family forum??

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     25 October 2010

this article shows that women are taking the law in their hands as indian courts have no hope for wronged people/victims

if only our legal system was strong enough and justice was accessible to poor people also,these women wud have depended on law to solve their problems.

AND WE PROUDLY SAY "India shining"

Huh!

Democratic Indian (n/a)     25 October 2010

"A 23-year-old resident of Bharat Nagar in Bandra (E), Shaikh was attacked with a knife and raped by a cousin of her husband in the wee hours of August 14 last year. Minutes later, Shaikh stabbed him to death with the same knife.............................When she refused to undress, he knifed her in the abdomen and raped her. After the act, Ansari threatened to kill her. “A traumatized Shaikh picked up the knife lying on the floor, grabbed him by his hair and slit his throat, killing him instantly’’

Above case is a clear case of self defense under Section 100 of IPC, hence she has done no offense or crime under law. Probably police is not aware that corrolary to the Right to Life and Liberty under Article 21 of our Constitution we have Sections 96 to 106 IPC.

IPC Section 100. When the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death

The right of private defence of the body extends, under the restrictions mentioned in the last preceding section, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right be of any of the descripttions hereinafter enumerated, namely :--

First- Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;

Secondly- Such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;

Thirdly- An assault with the intention of committing rape;

Fourthly- An assault with the intention of gratifying unnatural lust;

Fifthly- An assault with the intention of kidnapping or abducting;

Sixthly- An assault with the intention of wrongfully confining a person, under circumstances which may reasonably cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.

 

 

2 Like

hedevil hydraheaded (non professional )     26 October 2010

Very funny! 

The author of this thread has marked only a few ones and left some of the most important portions of this message unmarked!!!

Hemant Agarwal (ha21@rediffmail.com Mumbai : 9820174108)     27 October 2010

WIFE married Bizman to ROB him
(reproduced from Times of India, Mumbai Edition,  27-10-2010,  page no.  10)

 

7 L Theft: Accused Married Bizman With Intention To Rob Him


Mumbai: The Oshiwara police have arrested a 43-year-old woman who married an Andheri businessman after concealing information about her first marriage and then went on to clean out his house of cash and ornaments worth Rs 7 lakh.


Incidentally, the businessman, Kailash Jaiswal, also hid the fact that he was married from the accused, Roshanara Khan, before meeting her. “However, after their wedding, the complainant confessed to Khan about his real marital status and both decided to live together. Jaiswal then convinced his first wife to allow Khan to stay with them. But after a couple of months of living together, Khan stole cash as well as valuables from the house when she was alone and fled to her native place in Rajasthan,” an investigator said.


According to the cops, Khan came to Mumbai last year and was struggling to find work in films and TV serials when she met Jaiswal, an interior decorator. “Sensing an opportunity to make a quick buck, she lied to Jaiswal stating that her first husband, Shabbir, died leaving behind two children to take care of. But Shabbir is alive and lives in Rajasthan,” the investigator added.


She and her two college-going sons soon joined Jaiswal, who was staying with his first wife and four kids, resulting in a lot of tension and quarrels in the house. “On May 17, Khan stole the valuables and cash from the house, when Jaiswal went to work and his first wife went to the market for grocery shopping. She subsequently fled to Rajasthan along with her kids,” a police officer said.


Jaiswal then complained to the Oshiwara police about the theft and during the investigation, officials found out that Khan had married Jaiswal with the sole intention of robbing him.


The police registered a case against Khan on October 13, after which a team went to Rajasthan and arrested her in the case. She was produced before the court in Mumbai and remanded to police custody till October 27.


Officials stated that Shabbir was unaware about Khan’s second marriage in Mumbai but they are probing his possible involvement in the crime. The police are also inquiring if Khan had cheated any other person in the past using the same modus operandi.
 

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     27 October 2010

jaisi karni vaisi bharni...

husband was a fool and a dhokebaaz to his wife.so he also got dhoka...

cheater apni life me cheater ko hee attract karega.Kisi sant ko nahi..

he deserves it! the gal served him right. i salute her for finally leaving him after the robbery!

......................................................................................................................

this is the result of live in relations...so much confusion and tension!

MORAL OF THE STORY:

a live in partner can never be as faithful as the spouse

1 Like

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     27 October 2010

ask indira jaisingh to read and think over this news instead of glamourising live in relations and "respectable informal ladies"

Siv (engineer)     27 October 2010

Hi All,

never ever make law in favour of anyone, because that destroy their attitude ...and makes others to suffer. Law is Law and it should as it is for all.

 

Justice should not be denied to anubody just based on gender ...

Example:

 

Due to reservation to SC and ST we are supporting the backward people to gorw faster .... I love this target of growing them faster.... but not just by giving reservation on jobs or scholls etc. Govt has to help then with all the facilities and make them intlligent to serve people like that kind else they wont serve the nation and the capable peroson won't get opertunity to serve nation then its results are cumilative ....

 

Similarly laws in favour of women works in same way ... if law provide lienence toward women makes them think wild and that wildness passes to next generations and it grows faster ...

1 Like

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     27 October 2010

the law dint even come into the picture to help the bechari "cocubine deviji"...oops...." respectable informal lady"

the "lady" took compensation from the liar  by robbing him...she dint go to the court else she wud have to spend on lawyers and wait a long time to get compensated.

perhaps she got more than she cud get in DV case.:)

 

i believe if a woman is cheated by a married man who says he's unmarried but comes to know later that he's married...she shud sue him for sure.

but the court instead of maintaining her monthly shud order the liar to give her a heavy compensation for lying.

if the courts give monthly maintenance,they only encourage them to remain in touch thru this continuous money exchange.so how can man think of his wife and family?

 

but if the woman has relation with married man despite knowing his marital status,she shud not get compensated or maintained as she made a mistake willingly.....or else courts willonly prove that "women are irresponsible  fools" who dont know wots right for them

 

oh where is indira jaisingh.....i think she's planing strategies to fight for her rights.

Hemant Agarwal (ha21@rediffmail.com Mumbai : 9820174108)     29 October 2010

KILLER   MOM


Killer mom’s child deteriorates
(Times of India, Mumbai Edition dated 29-10-2010,  page no. 06)


Mumbai: “I want my baby to be happy and healthy,” said Deepika Parmar about one of her 48-day-old twins fighting for survival in the paediatric intensive care unit of the KEM Hospital. The other twin—a girl—died on Monday after 26-year-old Deepika allegedly threw her out of the hospital’s bathroom window. The condition of the baby boy seems to have deteriorated, though doctors maintained that he was stable.


Deepika broke down after speaking these few words. “I don’t know anything else (about flinging her daughter to death),” she said as she sat in the hospital’s corridor. The woman constable accompanying her said that she has been crying inconsolably since the incident took place.


Doctors at the KEM Hospital have put her on sleeping pills since Wednesday night after she complained of sleeplessness. Her husband Manish said that she has not got proper sleep and nutrition since a month and a half.     Till late on Thursday, the family was unaware that the police have pressed murder charges on Deepika. Manish said, “The police have not kept us in the loop. They just asked us some basic questions,” he said, adding that they did not even have a copy of the FIR or the baby’s post-mortem report.


The Bhoiwada police, though, maintained that murder charges were pressed after the preliminary evidence hinted towards Deepika’s involvement. “We may not wait for the child to be discharged. But, she will be arrested only after the baby is doing well,” said Vikram Patil, senior inspector of Bhoiwada police station.


The family, for the first time, admitted that Deepika suffered from some mental ailment for which they never sought any help. “She was under a lot of stress after we lost our daughter five years ago. It took her more than a month to recover from the shock,” said Manish. “But, having failed to carry the pregnancy to its full term, even this time took a huge toll on her,” he said.
Manish defended his wife’s act by saying that the law should take her mental health into consideration. “If she wanted to kill the baby, she could have done it much before,” he said. “She made this blunder because she was under unbearable mental anguish.”

 

QUESTION :  WHY DID THE  "WOMAN"  KILL THE  "GIRL CHILD"  AND NOT THE  "BOY CHILD"

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     29 October 2010

because if she did not kill,then she wud have to spend so much on her marriage and on giving dowry.

plus give her property rights

plus keep giving gifts to her sasural wale after marriage.

she may not have so much resources...and dint want to take such tensions ...dats why..

Renuka Gupta ( Gender Researcher )     29 October 2010

My reply may not be very relevant to the posting of the author. Yet this is an occasion to once again reflect on our faulty socialisation process concerning a girl child. 

To begin with let me point out that the trend of killing girl children should be strongly condemned. No reason can justify taking away the life of an innocent child. 

Coming to why a woman had to kill her own child. 

Well, a woman is in most cases forced to do this heinous act. Most people, including women are not aware that they are not responsible for the birth of a girl child, it is father of the child who is responsible. women often are taunted for giving birth to a girl child, are tortured if they give birth to a girl child, are compared with women who have sons. Then it is women's own mentality brainwashed by  patriarchal system, ( which deprives a girl child of her rights to education, equal share of property and to take decision about her life) which  is responsible to make her look down upon her own daughter/s. The same woman has internalised  the values of patriarchy which dis empowers girl children and women in her own as well as her matrimonial home. 

In this case, we do not know what was the external forces which would have induced this woman to commit this act. The context should be analysed thoroughly. Those who pull strings in accomplishing such criminal acts are as much responsible, rather  more responsible than the woman who may have killed her child. 

@ Roshni

Sharing property is a girl's right and she should not be deprived of it. At one point women themselves have to rise and resist against an institution which marginalises women. I do not spare parents who in stead of concentrating on making their daughters self reliant, push them into the institution of marriage. I do not spare parents who deprive their daughters of equal land and property rights in the name of spending money on marriage celebrations and giving jewels as Stree Dhan. Sometimes we forget that the formative part of a woman's life is  spent with her parents and siblings: A part of her life with lot of promises to grow up , given the proper opportunities and space to grow--which would evolve her as a confident and  self reliant human being. 

This does not mean that I do not understand many forms of discriminations that a girl child has to go through from womb to tomb. But just harping on the injustices she goes through in her married life would not reduce the drastic need for transformation in the way we bring up our girl children. The solution has to start from parental home for the girl children who are growing up and have yet to come to this world. 

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     29 October 2010

@ RENUKA

 

I fully agree with all ur views.i myself dont support this killing.i was just telling the author a woman's psychology behind committing infanticide.

just one small question to all readers..........

why did raja rammohan roy take britishers' help to ban sati thru laws?

why dint he just rely on women empowerment so that women start saying say no to it and also protect other women who are being forced to commit sati?

 

 

hedevil hydraheaded (non professional )     29 October 2010

It is simple.  Laws and empowerment goes together. One reinforces another. Certain pro active laws have come about by a strong lobbying from women's movement. 

 

Now see another situation!  Hindu property law gives equal right to women in the property but when parents write or forced to write wills in favour of sons, laws are circumvented by women disempowerment. It would need another assertive voices from women activists to plug this gap!

What I think Renuka Ji is driving at is that let us not make the socialisation process of a girl child which starts from parental home invisible by our focus entirely on her matrimonial home. Have I gotten you right, Renukaji!

 

 



Related Threads


Loading

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query