Showing posts with label supreme court. Show all posts
Showing posts with label supreme court. Show all posts

Saturday, 1 October 2022

CJI Must review SC Regressive Verdict on #MTPAct Linking with #MaritalRape : A Open Letter

To : 
The Chief Justice of India, 
Supreme Court , New Delhi 
India 

 Respected Sir, 

Being a responsible , law and constitution of India, abiding citizen, forced me to write this letter for your kind consideration to review the order passed by #MiLord Chandrachud, As Bopanna and JB Pardiwala. 

It was a perfect case where SC had opportunity to balance between Pro-Choice & Pro-Life by ordering or framing guidelines regarding unwanted unborn child or born child , how to take care via Women and Child Ministry Funded NGO. 

But it's pain to see that Pro-Life take back seat and pro-Choice take front seat and allow to kill a unborn child up to 24 weeks. Would like to attach the unborn Child reference Photo of 20 weeks and 24 weeks for your ready reference.


To bring your kind notice, Law makers already increased the law full right to abortion in #MTPAct from 12weeks to 20 weeks to 24 weeks for special cases, for which no one even objected. They are not just a fotues, its a life already formed. 

That's the reason maximum country are going towards Pro-Life than Pro-Choice. It's against humanity to allow kill a unborn child , rather than protecting a help less life.

Why this Judgement should be termed regressive and to be reviewed : 

1. Up to 20 weeks a women have pro-choice to decide the unborn child , does 20 weeks not sufficient for a women to decide ? If not where is end? Even just before deliver the baby or after deliver of baby also a women can claim to kill the child as per Pro-Choice and inability to take care the child, will SC allow the same too? 

2. To kill a unborn child the bench seek government support to such women to ensure safe killing of unborn child , but failed to consider same Government support should had been asked for saving the unborn child life. This not unfair ?

3. In the present case and pray by a unmarried women , there was no marriage involved, there was no forced or rape involved , still #MiLords entered in married relationship, was not uncalled for? Even on various case we asked to stick with the case at hand, where as #MiLords take a decision out of case without giving any opportunity of hearing from Husband side . Is that not Unfair? 

4. When the Rape Law is clearing mentioned any sexual relationship between Husband and wife , neither party can term other partner a Rapist, still on what basis #MiLords consider #MaritalRape should be a ground in #MTPAct ? It not entering and disrespect the Law making Process and Law makers wisdom? Is that allowed?

5. Regarding #MaritalRape Law already Delhi High Court given Spilt verdict and presently the same pending at SC. We had been reminded on multiple occasion by honorable court not to comment on sub judice case, but here #MiLords themselves giving judgment on a sub judice matters in a case which are not even related to any forced sex or rape case.  Why it should not considered an attempted to influence the on going cases in other court ?




6. After this #MTPAct order, every abortion can be termed as rape or  forced sex as in the order itself mentioned there is no requirement of any prove the claim is true or false. Is that called natural Justice? 

7. Most dangerous Part of the order: A Women (including wives) no need to prove there was any forced sex or rape . Her own word to be considered as gospel truth & she allowed to kill Unborn Child as per her wish & whims. Was #MTPAct was made for that purpose? Is that not Unfair?

With my limited submission, humble request to consider review the present order and correct the order accordingly keeping in mind the pro-life and respect the Indian existing Law .

My Pray : 


1. #MTPAct should be respected for 20weeks as per law makers wisdom and in case of special case pro-Life to considered and necessary guidelines and responsibility to Govt funded NGO to be given.

2. #MaritalRape should be removed from the Judgment as the same was never prayed in this petition and neither any submission considered why law makers don't allowed to term any sex between Husband and Wife not to be termed Rape. They have provided alternative remedy for the same to be used.

3. If Judiciary enters in law making process, does not respect law makers wisdom, then when Law makers will enters in the judiciary , it will not to be good for any citizen of India.


CC : Law and Justice Minister 
CC : Home Minister of India.

SC verdict on Abortion | #MaritalRape : Unmarried Women seek abortion of Child, no rape, no marriage, no force sex but why SC make order on #MaritalRape?
Now to give Birth a Child women may get 1-2L, but for killing unborn child may get 10 to 15L.




  

 

Posted by at No comments:
Family problem, Help men, Men Life Style, Men NGO , , , , , , ,

Thursday, 30 April 2020

Supreme Court Allows Child Visitation via Electronic media during Lockdown - A Panel Discussion


Save Family Foundation (SFF) & Men Welfare Trust (MWT), both registered NGOs, have been witnessing a huge surge on the issues specifically related to child visitation during Corona Lockdown.

Many of fathers, across India, have fought vigorously to get visitation orders to meet their children, amidst matrimonial disputes, from the respective Family Courts or Trial Courts. In many cases, our NGOs have come across the ordeals of fathers, who even after winning, are at the losing end, as the custodial mothers are misusing the Corona Lockdown to create a Chinawall between Father and Child.
Such Custodial Mothers have completely ignored the welfare of child and the rights of a child to meet their father. Since the existing visitation orders are not explicitly mentioning about the provision of Electronic Visitation (over Video Conferencing etc), many Custodial Litigating mothers are misusing this gap to their advantage. This has left many fathers helpless during these critical times and has created huge pressure on non-custodial fathers, about the health and safety of their children.

Seeing this huge issue for the very upbringing, rights of Children and respecting the intention of the courts, which granted visitation rights to father, a member of Men Welfare Trust (MWT) & Save Family Foundation (MWT), Dr. Tanuj Dhawan, took up the task of knocking the doors of justice at the highest level and filed an online Petition (PIL) in the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

While hearing and deciding the said petition by MWT, SFF member, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has issued clear observation that Electronic Contact instead of Physical visits can be substituted, keeping in view of the rights of the Child, non-Custodial parent and giving respect to the Intent of the respective Hon’ble courts, while granting visitation. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, further observed, that in case there is an aggrieved party (in this case, the non-custodial parent), they can approach to respective Family Court.

Based on these observations, MWT & SFF appeal to all the litigating parents to not use Corona or their own child as a tool of unleashing vengeance from the non-custodial parent (mostly fathers). The Observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court are clear about Electronic Visitation to continue, as directed in the visitation orders.

We also would appeal humbly to all the Hon’ble Family Courts and Trial Courts of India to take a note of these observations from the Apex Court and provide quick and urgent redressal to the aggrieved parent, whose right of having visitation (physical or Electronic, as observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court, herein) is getting curtailed by the Custodial Parent (mostly mothers), during these times of pandemic.

Courts must also take into account the conduct of a custodial parent in these times, where stopping the visitation show their clear intentions, being against child welfare and hence cancel the custody to such parents.

At last, we are short of words while thanking Dr. Tanuj Dhawan, who took this petition Party in Person to the Hon’ble Supreme Court and did applaudable handwork in getting it listed as an urgent PIL and getting positive observations from the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Breaking: Supreme Court Allows Parents Having Visitation Rights To Maintain Contact With Children Via Electronic Means [Read Order]


A message from Mr. Tanuj Dhawan for Nation & Some NGO's  Members who misusing the order to collect Donation from Victims!


Posted by at 1 comment:
Family problem, Help men, Men Life Style, Men NGO , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, 25 March 2015

66A Scraped what about 498A , 354 and 376 ?

On the eve of SC #Scrap66A , we all welcome the decision and establish that a badly drafted law can only lead to havoc in Society.


There are many such laws like 498A , Molestation ( 354) , Rape(376) also fall in that category .


The Indian constitutions article 15(3) had been misused just for Vote bank in the name of Women or caste , the way in 66A the constitutions 19(2) was misused, but in reality there is no improvement in society for what such provision was made.


As per New Law if a women can term any Men as Molester or rapist without any medical evidence. 

 

Mere on her Verbal allegations, you will be arrested and even after court trail found the same was #Fakecases hardly any Police officer or Judge will evoke CRPC340 or IPC 182.

 

Our Law Makers and women organizations along with some radical Feminist  Ideology Electronic Media always promoted such decoration Law as Non-Bailable , lead to massive Misuse and violation of Constitution article 21-( Live & Liberty) .

 

Now , when SC will wake up and take corrective action against such LAW which had been made under misuse of article 15(3) by violating article 21?

 




One Delhi Girl Almost Ruined The Lives Of 2 Boys With Her False Gang-Rape Testimony. Here's What Happened


Indiatimes has in its possession the formal judgment (dated 28 February 2015) pronounced in the 2012 ‘Amity rape’ incident. The incident dates back to 2012, when a girl had accused two boys of gang-raping her. 3 years later, the incident received a conclusion – the boys were free to go. During this time, the boys served 1 year in prison, and 2 years of regular criminal proceedings.

After 3 years of being labeled criminals by society, friends and family, Prashant and Milind, 2 Amity University boys have been acquitted by a trial court of allegations of raping a fellow student. The court pulled up Delhi Police and the investigating officer (IO) for carrying out a biased probe, cooking up evidence and hiding crucial information in the case which proved the innocence of the accused.


According to the police, the alleged incident took place on the afternoon of June 14, 2012. Prashant called the woman, who was his batch-mate, to Vasant Vihar to watch a movie. He was accused of giving her an alcoholic drink, driving her to a secluded place in Paschim Vihar in his Honda City car, calling his friend Milind to the spot and gang-raping her.

At face value, you can see that the testimony the girl gave was pretty damning – there was the dramatic allegation – intoxication and violently forcing a girl to submit to rape.

And just her statement was enough. Just her testimony led to investigating officers framing charges on the two boys. She also claimed that she had been treated so badly that she "had developed suicidal tendencies". Her statements were treated with even more delicacy particularly in the wake of gruesome attacks on women in the last 3 years after the infamous Nirbhaya incident. 

And then her testimony fell apart.


There was no DNA evidence.


The girl was admitted at New Delhi's AIIMS Hospital for 14 days after the rape, during which NO vaginal examination was conducted. She also said that the boys who gang-raped her had washed her clean to get rid of evidence. However, there was no residual DNA on her clothes. She also made accusations of “unnatural sex” – but evidence didn’t prove it. 

And what about the scene of the crime?


Police didn't actually investigate the scene of the crime, the place where she claimed she was raped. 

And the violence against her?


If they had explored the place, they MIGHT have found traces of her blood that spilled when she cut her leg there. When there were no cut marks on her body, she claimed that she was beaten with an ice bag. 

Which was also false - as Advocate Prashant Mendiretta, counsel for the accused, informed us. How can this ice not have melted in 42 degree temperature, in a room that had no fridge, air conditioning or even a fan? These were the conditions she described of the room she was supposedly raped in.

Psychological trauma?  


The court also rejected the prosecution's claim that the woman was so traumatised that she initially did not report the rape but only spoke about assault. Relying on hospital records and other evidence, the court said the woman was in her senses when she was examined on June 15, 2012, a day after the alleged incident. The court also observed that it appeared that the woman, after the incident, faked psychiatric disorders and was therefore referred a senior psychiatrist at AIIMS. The woman spoke about being gang-raped by the duo only on June 28, 2012, 14 days after the incident.

The evidence that sealed her fate and saved the boys,

Cellphone records obtained show that during the time when she was allegedly being assaulted and raped, there were multiple calls made to her phone.

She spoke 1000 seconds: with her friend
She spoke 300 seconds: with her father
She spoke 400 seconds: with her mother

This is among 50-60 calls she made/received from her number. 

And yet, not once did anyone raise alarm. 

The cellphone tower position logs indicated movement of the cellphone. How can someone get raped, and have someone make/receive 50-60 calls from their phone?


The judge urged the police chief to frame guidelines making it mandatory for IOs to bring to the notice of the accused all evidence in a case, including those that favour the accused.  "She (the IO) has betrayed the trust reposed by the public upon a police official. The aim of the police officer should be to collect evidence and not to create it...(She) committed breach of professional standards by ignoring, disregarding and withholding material evidence which pointed to the innocence of the accused," the court noted while delivering the verdict.

With inputs from Sana Shakil, TNN



Want to #StopAbuseofMen by #Fakecases ? Call 0-8882-498-498 to Join # SaveIndianFamily Movement.
Any law which allow registration of compliant on assumption should be  Bailable only. Let the assumption proved in court and then Arrest them , if required for Investigation .

 









Posted by at 4 comments:
Family problem, Help men, Men Life Style, Men NGO , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, 9 July 2014

SC:No abuse of arrests under anti-dowry law, time to make 498A bailable


The Committee fears that failure to do so might leave no option except to dilute the law by making the same non-cognizable and bailable. In this context, the Committee recommends certain additional measures as contained in the succeeding paragraphs.




No Dowry arrests till magistrate's nod: SC , why such order made ? Look at the Graph , one hand the arrest of people is increasing in 498a , but after long trail Court found more than 85% people are not guilty. 


From the supreme court July,2014 judgment , it had proved beyond reasonable dought the government and police had failed to check the misuse of 498a and so the time had came to make the same bailable , demand Save Family Foundation and their associated organizations , as from the past experience , we witness such Judgments never followed by Police or by Government.
If we go through the NCRB data of 2013 recently released , the arrest had further incresed from 1.97L to 2.2 L , where as it was expected the same will be reduced as per new provision of CRPC41.

This is the 5th time Supreme Court had highlighted the need of stop the misuse of Dowry law like #IPC498a , but Government or Police had never taken any corrective actions.
In the last Parliament committee report by Rajya Sabah , it was clearly mentioned if the misuse of 498A does not reduced they have no option but to make it bailable.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday said women were increasingly using the anti-dowry law to harass in-laws and restrained police from mechanically arresting the husband and his relatives on mere lodging of a complaint under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
Citing very low conviction rate in such cases, it directed the state governments to instruct police "not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498A of IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters (check list) provided under Section 41 of criminal procedure code".
Section 41 lays down a 9-point check list police to weigh the need to arrest after examining the conduct of the accused, including possibility of his absconding.
Expressing exasperation over rampant misuse of Section 498A, a bench of Justices C K Prasad and P C Ghose said if police arrested the accused, the magistrate should weigh the preliminary evidence against the Section 41 checklist before allowing further detention.
"The magistrate, while authorising detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms of Section 41 and only after recording its satisfaction, the magistrate will authorize detention," the bench said.
It also said that this check-list for arrest and detention would apply to all offences, which are punished with a prison term less than 7 years. Punishment under Section 498A is a maximum of three years but it had been made a cognizable and non-bailable offence, which made grant of bail to the accused a rarity in courts.
But the court singled out the dowry harassment cases as the most abused and misused provision, though the legislature had enacted it with the laudable object to prevent harassment of women in matrimonial homes.

Writing the judgment for the bench, Justice Prasad said there had been a phenomenal increase in dowry harassment cases in India in the last few years. "The fact that Section 498A is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives," he said.
"The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bed-ridden grand-fathers and grand-mothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested," he said.
The bench quoted "Crime in India 2012 Statistics" published by National Crime Records Bureau to say that nearly 2 lakh people were arrested in India in 2012 under Section 498-A, which was 9.4% more than in 2011.
"Nearly a quarter of those arrested under this provision in 2012 were women i.e. 47,951 which depicts that others and sisters of the husbands were liberally included in their arrest net. Its share is 6% out of the total persons arrested under the crimes committed under Indian Penal Code. It accounts for 4.5% of total crimes committed under different sections of penal code, more than any other crimes excepting theft and hurt," it said.
"The rate of charge-sheeting in cases under Section 498A is as high as 93.6%, while the conviction rate is only 15%, which is lowest across all heads. As many as 3,72,706 cases are pending trial of which on current estimate, nearly 3,17,000 are likely to result in acquittal," the bench said illustrating the misuse of Section 498A as a tool to harass husband and his relatives.
Describing arrest as a humiliating experience apart from curtailing the freedom, the bench said police have not shed their colonial hangover despite six decades of independence and were still considered "as a tool of harassment, oppression, and surely not considered a friend of public".
The need for caution in exercising the drastic power of arrest had been emphasized time and again by courts but has not yielded results, the court said and tasked the magistrates to check illegal arrests.
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1277 OF 2014
date of order: 2 July 2014
LANDMARK JUDGEMENT OF J. CHANDRAMOULI KR. PRASAD ISSUED TODAY
DIRECTION TO POLICE....DON'T JUMP AND ARREST AT DROP OF A HAT....SERVE NOTICE UNDER 41A
Our endeavour in this judgment is to ensure that police  officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorize detention  casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction:

 (1) All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves
 about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from  Section 41, Cr.PC;
(2) All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub-clauses
 under Section 41(1)(b)(ii);
(3) The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention;
(4) The Magistrate while authorising detention of the accused shall peruse the report
 furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorize detention;
(6) Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the accused  within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing;
(7) Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction.
(8) Authorising detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court.
We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine.

We direct that a copy of this judgment be forwarded to the Chief Secretaries as also the Director Generals of Police of all the State Governments and the Union Territories and the Registrar General of all the High Courts for onward transmission and ensuring its compliance.


Must watch :


DD NEWS Hindi : http://youtu.be/8_kS_QjzpJ8
DD NEWS English : http://youtu.be/aZCD4wqNch0








Posted by at No comments:
Family problem, Help men, Men Life Style, Men NGO , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, 10 September 2013

Who is more possessive a wife against her husband or media Journalist against men?

Stop Abuse of IPC498A act in India


Many common people unaware the fact of IPC497 , for a wife even adultery also is not a crime (it is a rewarding option and free money earning business for the whole life), but for a man even an allegation of “Name-calling” is crime and not only the man, his mother/sister/age-old father also can be put behind the bar under 498A or DV act.

Any allegation by a wife against husband to be considered as TRUE irrespective the same is true or false. Same way a Case was registered against a Husband, that his wife suspects his relationship with another women in his office , so she suicide.  There was no evidence to that aligation or ill treatment to her , but our great law booked him under 498A , 306.
More surprise the lower court and high court also termed him as wife killer .


The person have to suffer all trouble legally, socially, have to run pillar to post to get bail and spend months in Jail without any investigation as 498A is non-bailable and at last SC found , he is not Guilty , but who will compensate him for the incorrect Judgments of Lower court and high court ?
 Writing a judgment for the bench, Justice Radhakrishnan said to charge a husband for abatement of suicide, the prosecution must establish that the wife's suicide was a direct result of the extra-marital affair.

"Prosecution has to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the deceased committed suicide and the accused abetted the commission of suicide. But for the alleged extra-marital relationship, which if proved, could be illegal and immoral, nothing has been brought out by the prosecution to show that the accused had provoked, incited or induced the wife to commit suicide," the court said.
"We have on facts found that, at best, the relationship of A-1 (the husband) and A-2 (the other woman) was a one-sided love affair. The accused might have developed some liking towards A-2, his colleague, (but) all the same, the facts disclose that A-1 had discharged his marital obligations towards the deceased. There is no evidence of physical or mental torture demanding dowry," the court said.

Referring to the wife's suicide note, the bench said, "On reading the suicide note, one can infer that the deceased was so possessive of her husband, and was always under emotional stress that she might lose her husband. Too much of possessiveness could also lead to serious emotional stress, over and above the fact that she had one abortion and her daughter died after few days of birth."

Just for a moment if the case had been reverse, like a Husband suicide with a suspect that his wife had relationship with other men at office, will a case will be registered against the women?





      Sorry to say the answer is a Big No , as neither 498A or IPC497 applicable for Women. LAW commission had asked to make the adultery crime for both gender , but our LAW makers had not taken any action and NCW even further go ahead with amended in CRPC125 , that a women should get maintenance from husband in spite it had been proved she was living in adultery, as they changed the word "Lived in adultery" to "Living in adultery".         
Means a women can lived in adultery, husband proved in court , but after few months she can come back and say , now I am not living in adultery and claim maintenance under CRPC125 again.  




For Indian men, it does not matter, irrespective the allegation is true or false, not only you, your mother, sister, age old father will be thrown out of your own house under DV act, just one line complain by your wife.   

But some of our media Journalist are so possessive for any judgments in favor of men they also can't digest and as soon as the judgment passed they write :

Adultery is not cruelty, Supreme Court says. Times of India.




They twist the fact that SC said passiveness of a wife for Husband and without any evidence of adultery of husband can't be a ground for Cruelty.



If they had not Possessive against men , then they must have highlighted how a men had suffered in wrong 498A cases as his wife was possessive against him  without any evidence.

Merely being "intimate" with another woman is not sufficient ground for a man to be held guilty of inflicting cruelty on his wife on the charge of failing to discharge his marital obligations, the Supreme Court ruled on. 


If a Husband had done adultery the same is Punishable as per IPC497 , but how can the same can be a crime when there is no evidence of his wrong doing or ill-treatment of wife under 498A?

Yes the great law 498A is there where you can book any TOM/DICK or Harry and even lower court/high court convect you on mere assumption a crime which You had never done.


So, the question arise who is more possessive  a wife against her husband or media Journalist against men?

Every Men in India are under high risk of #Fakecases at Home, Office, Road due to multiple anti-Men #Unfairlaw - which became Blackmailing/Extortion Tool. To survive or #FightBack knowledge is Key. Law is not any rocket Science. Buy & start Read Law Books Now!
Posted by at 1 comment:
Family problem, Help men, Men Life Style, Men NGO , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)