PPT to stop the legal terrorism

PPT to stop the legal terrorism

• 1. Supreme Court on 498 A Sushil Kumar Sharma Vs Union of India and Ors (Writ Petition (civil) 141 of 2005) “The object of the provision is prevention of the dowry meance. But as has been rightly contended by the petitioner many instances have come to light where the complaints are not bonafide and have filed with obligue motive. In such cases acquittal of the accused does not in all cases wipe out the ignomy suffered during and prior to trial. Sometimes adverse media coverage adds to the misery. The question, therefore, is what remedial measures can be taken to prevent abuse of the well-intentioned provision. Merely because the provision is constitutional and intra vires, does not give a licence to unscrupulous persons to wreck personal vendetta or unleash harassment. It may, therefore, become necessary for the legislature to find out ways how the makers of frivolous complaints or allegations can be appropriately dealt with. Till then the Courts have to take care of the situation within the existing frame work. As noted the object is to strike at the roots of dowry menace. But by misuse of the provision a new legal terrorism can be unleashed. The provision is intended to be used a shield and not assassins‘ weapon. If cry of "wolf" is made too often as a prank assistance and protection may not be available when the actual "wolf" appears.”

  
  

  Why hasn’t Government acted to prevent misuse even when Supreme Court asked them to ?

• 2. Supreme Court of India Term “Legal Terrorism”• 
• The Supreme Court with a Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and H K Sema has agreed with petitioner Sushil Kumar Sharma that Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, which seeks to protect women from being harassed for dowry, was being misused through frivolous cases filed by women to trouble their in-laws.
•  By misuse of the provision a new “Legal Terrorism” can be unleashed, says Bench Merely because the provision is declared constitutional, it does not give license to unscrupulous persons to wreak personal vendetta.• 
• Justices Arijit Pasayat and H K Sema added a word of caution, saying, "Merely because the provision is constitutional, it does not give a license to unscrupulous persons to wreck personal vendetta or unleash harassment."• 
• The judges called upon the legislature to refine the Section and "find out ways how frivolous complaints or allegations can be appropriately dealt with".• 
• But till date our Government /legislature have not shown any concern to stop this “Legal Terrorism” is best Known to them.
• 3. Supreme Court of India Term “Legal Terrorism”• 
• "In such cases acquittal of the accused does not wipe out the ignominy suffered during and prior to trial. Sometimes adverse media coverage adds to the misery". Merely because the provision was declared constitutional and intra vires, it did not give license to unscrupulous persons to wreak personal vendetta or unleash harassment, the judges said.• 
• "The object is to strike at the root of dowry menace. But by misuse of the provision a new legal terrorism can be unleashed. The provision is intended to be used as a shield and not an assassins weapon. If [the] cry of "wolf" is made too often as a prank, assistance and protection may not be available when the actual wolf appears", the Bench said.• 
• The investigating agencies could not follow a straitjacket formula in matters of dowry torture, deaths and cruelty.• "
• The role of the investigating agencies and courts is that of a watchdog and not of a bloodhound. It should be their effort to see that an innocent person is not made to suffer on account of unfounded, baseless and malicious allegations," the Bench said.
• 4. Who Are We …
• Victims of Legal Terrorism in India• 
• We are working professionals( IIT/IIM/Engineer/Doctors/MBA/IT Engineers/Media Journalist/Judge/Police all except Politicians) and are were working for family harmony.• 
• We want Domestic Harmony Act , but Government refuse the same.• 
• We want gender Equal Law , men/women to be replace by the word Person and Wife/Husband to be replace by Spouse in all Indian IPC Law.• 
• Till Date no Politicians/Ministers had been arrested in 498A or DV act case, but common people arrested without any investigation and more than 98% face the money extortion the way a Terrorist do with Common people.• 
• When ever any Politician of Ministers accused of 498A or DV act, even women ministers also come out openly to give him Clean Chit.• Why different law for Politicians/Ministers in India? 
•  
• Stop Legal Terrorism and Save your Life 
•  

• Request all to wake up and meet your MP/MLA/Minister and demand :

  1. The word "Men/women" should be replaced by the word "Person" immediately. If Women do not rape the Men, means physical relation with out consent of other party, why they afraid to accept the Gender Neutral Rape law?
  2. Any Physical relation with promise of marriage or any other benefit should not be termed as Rape, it should resolved as per Fraud/cheating/blackmailing law as per merit of cases.
  3. When two adult person living together without marriage the same termed "Live-in-relation" and if any partner want to come out from the same should not be crime, as people have choice to choose live together after marriage or before marriage.
  4.Marriage related LAW should be made bailable offense, like all over world have and to be resolved in civil law only. If there is any crime done the same is already covered in IPC by Domestic violence law, attempt to murder law, hurt to injury law, extortion and blackmailing law along with dowry provision act DP3/4.
  4.  Such law not only duplication of law , but abuse of natural Justice system of India.Where the women and their family can get whole sale free license to abuse the Mens and do the extortion of money/property in the name of Rape under mutual consent physical realtionship. Why the same should not be termed as crime?
  5. By default punishment to misuser should be must when court find the FIR had been registered to hide their own crime or to gain any favor like money/property from other party.

   
•