MyNation Foundation – News

News Articles from MyNation, india – News you can use

Archive for April 25th, 2007

The survey revealed that close to 60 per cent women have had sexual relations before marriage.

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

A survey by says 70% of Indian women do not like the idea of getting “revirginated” even if given an
Sidhi Chadha

The verdict is out. Indian women are not too keen on re-virgination though the demand for virgin brides remains a constant. Sta tistics confirm this. Only one in a hundred girls care to restore their virginity surgically in the country. A web survey conducted by says a resounding 70 per cent gave the thumbs-down to the idea of getting “revirginated” even if given an opportunity. The survey also reflects the changing mindset. The modern Indian woman is not too hung up on virginity. While men face a dilemma, most still prefer a virgin wife, educated or not. Not many know ‘revirgination’ has been around in India for a while and this “wonder” technique is popular in several countries. The myth of revirgination: It is best answered by the myth generated around the procedure. The Internet and some magazines went on an overdrive that it would spice up the sex life. Now who doesn’t want that? The debate was set-off by a report from the West on vaginal reconstruction. The 40-year-old woman concerned wanted to go in for this drastic technique as a gift to her husband.

Sexologist Dr Prakash Kothari who has conducted vaginal reconstruction surgery warns, “It is a painful and an artificial treatment. Women should not tamper with nature. People have a misconception that regaining virginity can lead to a better sex life.” Virginity is still inextricably linked in the male psyche. So women feel a need to protect their men from the truth about their sexual past.

It is just cheating: The survey revealed that close to 60 per cent women have had sexual relations before marriage. “Virginity is no more a virtue in India.

It matters only to those who want to break down doors,” says Dr Kothari. About 59 per cent women feel a relationship is not just about sex. But they feel honesty may not be the best idea when it comes to intimate relations. Dr Kothari says, “It’s the biggest myth that men can find out whether a girl is a virgin or not.

The survey says 414 women were afraid of what their partner would think if their sexual history was disclosed. The oft repeated responses — “My partner might hate me”, “My sexual past will ruin my marriage.”Around 46 per cent feel that revirgination is nothing more than a ploy to cheat your spouse.

(The survey received responses from 928 surfers of which 746 were women.)
Source : The survey revealed that close to 60 per cent women have had sexual relations before marriage.

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »


Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

The National Commission for Women feels that the law needs to be amended to reflect the “realities of today”. But human beings cannot cope quite as well with reality (or at least too much of it) as they do with the rhetoric of welfare. This is betrayed by the NCW’s recommendation that adultery should be treated as a civil, and not a criminal, offence because it is an act between consenting individuals, as also a “breach of trust” between adults. Given the private nature of this “offence”, the State should not arbitrate in this matter.
Girija Vyas, chairperson of the NCW, has also opposed the amendment of Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, which deals with sexual offences like adultery, because women, she believes, are always “victims”, however consensual their participation in an adulterous relationship. The logic of her demand had rested on the fact that women are generally in a disempowered position, therefore laws to protect them must be strengthened. Her contention was strongly contested, and the NCW has asked for a national consensus on this issue.
The practical difficulties of arriving at a national consensus in India are obvious. There is the difficulty of figures, and figures is one area in which India can offer serious competition. With a staggering population spread across diverse geographical, socio-cultural and educational backgrounds, the absurdity of a consensus on women’s sexual behaviour is self-evident. The bathos deepens because this is not even a question of women’s sexuality in marriage, something that can at least be acknowledged, but one of adultery, an unspeakable, widely condemned “transgression” . But attitudes to adultery vary immensely, depending on class (both economic and social) and education.

[b]Justice awaited[/b]
By making women victims by default, Vyas has reinforced the stereotype of women having no agency in or authority over their lives. They might be in a legally disempowered position, but that certainly does not mean they do not want to live out their sexuality. The perpetuation of victimhood entails transferring a burden of self-righteousness onto many who might be perfectly at ease with confronting their desire, or at least be willing to do so.
Women might be victims of social injustice but they don’t necessarily become victims of their desire. Remember Swapna, the young woman claiming to be the “second wife” of the Hyderabadi engineer, Kasula Suryanarayana, who was executed by taliban last April? Within hours of Suryanarayana’ s death, Swapna had visited his bereaved family with a baby girl wailing in her arms (whom she claimed as her child with Suryanarayana) . She claimed a portion of the compensation for the child, never denying all along her knowledge of Suryanarayana’ s first wife or his children from his “legal” marriage. Suryanarayana’ s death had put her in a strangely paradoxical situation. While her “extra-legal” marriage, with nothing but photographs to speak for it, was invalid, the dead man also saved her from being socially ostracized. Despite her repeated admission of being complicit in Suryanarayana’ s bigamy, the tide of sympathy flowed towards her, the victim of not only one man’s false promises
but also the entire social justice system. Victimhood was thrust upon Swapna even as she resisted it from the outset.
Presently, only the rights of the illegitimate child is protected by Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. There is no provision for women like Swapna, who are not legally married. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act has redefined domestic relationships to protect not only wives but also women living in relationships in “the nature of marriage”. The NCW’s demand for ensuring alimony for women in live-in relationships can perhaps change the way women like Swapna are forced to face the consequences of their sexuality.


Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Domestic Violence Act comes to the aid of housewife

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

The protection of women from domestic violence via the Domestic Violence Act, which came into force two months ago, has come to the aid of a housewife here who successfully claimed possession of the house her husband built for his “second wife.”

Valsala Chandran from Mariyathura, Aymanam in Kottayam district, has become the first woman in the State to win a case against her husband under the Act.

Kottayam first class judicial magistrate N K Prasannakumari directed that Valsala occupy the house at Sasthamangalam built by her estranged husband Chandrasekharan Nair, now living with another woman in the gulf.

Valsala, who was a military officer, had given up her job after her marriage and had moved with her husband to the gulf. She returned to Kerala after spending ten years there.

Nair, who is running a business in the gulf, started living with another woman who he ‘married’ without divorcing Valsala. He also forced her to leave the house he constructed at Sasthamangalam in the city, it was alleged.

Valsala filed a petition in the Kottayam family court which issued attachment notice to the house built at a cost of Rs 1 crore. When she was refused entry to the house, Valsala approached the court under the protection of women against Domestic Violence Act after which she was granted permission to occupy the house.

The court also directed the Thiruvananthapuram Police Commissioner to give protection to Valsala and her two sons.

This is the first case in Kerala to have extended the benefit of the Domestic Violence Act in favour of the victim, Valsala’s advocate Ramachandran Kunnapally said.

Source : Domestic Violence Act comes to the aid of housewife

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Armed with legal ammo, women set to flex muscle

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

With so much ammo for girl power, is the man-woman relationship set to change?

Wo-ah-man, this is all set to be the year of the women. Last year, the courts and the government were busy giving Indian women legal sanctions that can make the man of the house think twice before ‘expressing’ himself.

The man-woman relationship, it is a-changing. With so much legal ammo at their disposal, will women make men feel the heat?

We takes a look at the institution of marriage, as well as live-in relationships, the way they will be morphing in the year 2007… and whether it will be all women-centric?

The powerpuff girls

Women are unanimous… this is the time to open the bubbly and propose a toast. As designer Rina Dhaka says, “In no way are these laws unfair. They were sorely needed because domestic violence against women is a severe problem in our country.”

Author Shobhaa De adds her voice to this too. “It is about time laws were tilted in favour of women because they have suffered centuries of discrimination,”she asserts.

And do men need such laws too? “No,”says lawyer Pinki Anand emphatically, adding, “Why safeguard men when the discrimination is mostly against women.”

Are men feeling cornered?

But with so much power for the girls, the male of the species is feeling threatened. Says Swaroop Sarkar, one of the moderators for the Save Indian Family Foundation, “Under the present circumstances, the husband is either cornered or is declared a criminal by his wife or girlfriend.

I think the fault lies with the way the laws have been drafted. While, the words ‘dignity of a women’ are mentioned in the Indian Constitution, there is no reference to the dignity of a man. Where does a man go for redressal?”

Men are also worried that these laws will be used against them. Says newly-married Samay Arora, “Saying something to your wife in anger may land you in jail.

Who decides the monetary worth of the gifts exchanged during wedding, but the wife can claim much more than what she actually brought with her.

Women can turn the fight over a loveless marriage into a mental and physical harassment case.”

On the other hand, there are metrosexual males who are all for more power to the women. “Women deserve this respite. They have suffered for so long. And I fail to understand why men should feel victimised,”says actor Jas Arora.

Adds filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt, “It is high time that the scales tilt in the favour of women because India remains a male dominated society where men get away with a lot.”

Marriage, it’s a-changing

But whether or not these laws are biased, they will surely change the balance of man-woman relationships. “These rulings have made women more conscious of their rights than ever before,”says Ranjana Kumari, director, Centre for Social Research.

“Relationships are bound to change. While men were considered to be the backbone of families and women were considered inferior, they have now started to emerge stronger than ever before.”

De cites the example of the Supreme Court ruling that says that a divorced mother’s remarriage will not affect her right to the custody of a child.

“It makes it easier for women to take some pretty painful decisions like walking out of a marriage,”she says. Adds Aamna Kher, a graphic design artiste, “You know now where you stand and what are your rights.

Women don’t need to be in a loveless or exploitative relationship just because they don’t know how they would fend later. The law has given us enough means, the rest is up to us now.”And how women do it is what 2007 will be all about!!”

Source : Armed with legal ammo, women set to flex muscle

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Women’s panel seeks adultery debate

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

New Delhi: Should adultery be treated as a crime or a civil offence? The National Commission for Women (NCW) on Wednesday said a national debate must settle the issue.

“It is an important issue and we have suggested to the government that a national consensus is needed on whether adultery should be treated as a civil wrong and not a crime,” said NCW Chairperson Girija Vyas.

“The view that we have got from women, NGOs and activists is that adultery should be treated as a civil wrong,” she said.

The Central Government had asked the Commission to review Section 497, which treats women accused of adultery as victims and doesn’t allow their husbands to prosecute them.

The commission has suggested to the Ministry of Women and Child Development that Section 497 must not be changed. “Under the present law a woman is always the victim, and we want this to be maintained,” PTI quoted Vyas as saying.

Permitting punishment of women could lead to its misuse, with husbands denying alimony or maintenance to their wives on grounds of adultery.

The commission has also suggested that Section 198(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which doesn’t allow women to prosecute unfaithful husbands.

The commission says as women are empowered to sue their husbands under various other laws, stopping them from using Section 198(2) is not correct.
Source : Women’s panel seeks adultery debate

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

NCW backtracks on adultery advice

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

NEW DELHI: Even as it maintained that women in extra-marital relationships should be treated as victims rather than culprits, National Commission for Women (NCW) reiterated that adultery by either a man or a woman should be treated as a civil offence.

The commission on Wednesday said that the “crime of adultery” being treated as civil rather than a criminal offence was a “suggestion” and that the issue must be addressed in a national debate.

“It is an important issue and we have suggested to the government that a national consensus is needed on whether adultery should be treated as a civil wrong and not a crime,” NCW chairperson Girija Vyas said.

She said it was up to government now to either accept the commission’s recommendation. “The view that we have got from women’s complaints, NGOs and activists is that adultery should be treated as a civil wrong,” she added.

Source : NCW backtracks on adultery advice

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

NCW Promoting live-in (FREE SEX)

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

The National Commission for Women has recommended the Government to make suitable changes in the law to entitle women in live-in relations to get maintenance from her partner if he chooses to dump her.
In its recent recommendations to the Government, NCW suggested that the scope of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, under which a wife, legitimate or illegimate child and parents are entitled to get maintenance from a man, to include women in live-in relations.

The Commission cited the example of the recently notified Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 wherein domestic relationship has been defined broadly to include any relationship in the nature of marriage.

The Commission felt that if the benefits of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act can be extended to women in a relationship in the nature of marriage, “there is no reason that provisions of Section 125 of CrPC should not be extended to them.”

The Commission said, “there are many instances where a woman unwittingly enters into wedlock with a man or they live together in a relationship like marriage and are later deserted or shunned. In such cases the woman is left with little or no sustenance.”

Centre for Social Studies Director Ranjana Kumari welcomed the NCW move. “Extending legal protection to women in live-in relations would provide adequate protection to them when men deny the relationship. It is all the more important because it is easy to deny such relationship… easier than matrimonial relationship, ” she said.
Kumari said that a woman doubly suffers in live-in relationship because she doesn’t get social as well as legal legitimacy and approval and runs the risk of being left to fend for herself and children at any point of time as there is no social or legal binding.
In its recommendation, the Commission cited a recent Supreme Court case wherein a woman in live-in relationship with a man in Gujarat had a child and was tortured and thrown out. The court turned down her plea for maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC on the ground that she was not a lawfully married wife of the man in question.

The Supreme Court had observed, “the Legislature considered including within the scope of Section 125 of CrPC an illegitimate child but it has not done so with respect to a woman not lawfully married.”
“Section 125 CrPC does not provide protection to such women who unwittingly get into relationships with married men. This being an inadequacy in the law it can be undone only by the Legislature, ” the apex court had said.
According to Section 125 of CrPC, if any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain his wife, including divorced one but not remarried, a legitimate or illegitimate minor child or parents can be ordered to pay maintenance to them if they are unable to maintain themselves.
The NCW suggested that Clause (1)(a) of Section 125 of CrPC should be amended so as to include any woman living with a man in a relationship in the nature of marriage and unable to maintain herself.

Source : NCW Promoting live-in (FREE SEX)

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Adulterated – NCW

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

If you want to know what the law has to say about adultery in India, like most other laws, it’s best to refer to a statute made by the British in 1860, that is, three years after the Mutiny. Come to think of it, it’s the only thing you can refer to while defining adultery in the courts of this country.

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code has no time to quibble. It reads: “Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery.”

It’s clear that since the guilty party as well as the victim are men, women don’t really figure as, pardon the pun, flesh-and-blood entities. It also makes it clear that the wherewithal that is required to be an adulterer is lacking in women. So, like lesbianism, unfaithful women simply don’t exist in this country. (Incidentally, the law against homosexuality does not include women as Queen Victoria, during whose reign the current Indian law was made, did not believe that lesbians exist.) Thus, the plea made by National Commission for Women Chairperson Girija Vyas about the woman always being the victim, never an offender.

So the normal recourse for an aggrieved husband is to knock on the door of the man with whom his wife is having sexual relations and address him in the following way, “Bhai-saab, I don’t recall me giving you permission to sleep with my wife. And considering that my wife, like all other wives, are prisoners of our hormonal activities, it would be prudent on your part to prepare for a long drawn-out court-room battle — man to man, cuckolder to adulterer.”

Curiously enough, there is little the wife can do if her husband is smart enough to stray but sticks to unmarried — and, therefore, not a part of any man’s property — ladies. Thus, the law provides a small but significant window for those who have no other option but to be unfaithful to their wives.

The maximum punishment for adultery is five years in jail or a fine or both. Which gives the wife of an adulterer ample time to seek compensation outside the ambit of the law.

Source : Adulterated – NCW

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

What did feminsts do in the name of equality?

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

What did feminsts do in the name of equality?

1) National Commission for Women (NCW) has shot down proposals for amending Section 497. Therefore, women cannot be prosecuted for adultery. They are still “hapeless victims”.

2) NCW is proposing the modification of Section 198(2) so that the wife of a man who commited adultry can now file a complaint against her husband and get him punished for adultry.

This is called “gender equality”.

The final sentence of the news article says “The NCW has, however, said this should be done only after a national consensus is formed on the issue.”

Let me tell you what “national consensus” means in this context. National consensus means what the National Commission for Women thinks because if someone disagrees with them there are going to be loud protests by rowdy women and many pieces of furniture may be broken.

Our leaders and law enforcement officials value furniture more than our welfare. But if we value our own rights we should oppose these recommendations of NCW.

A note on the IPC sections mentioned above

Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) perceives a consensual sexual intercourse between a man, married or unmarried, and a married woman without the consent or connivance of her husband as an offence of “adultery”.

A sexual link between a married or unmarried man and an unmarried woman or a divorcee or a widow, therefore, does not come within the ambit of “adultery”.

It also holds the man and not the (adulteress) “wife” of another man, who has been unfaithful to her husband, solely responsible for the sexual liaison.

IPC, it seems, views “adultery” as an invasion of the right of the husband over his wife and therefore puts it under Chapter XX: “Of Offences Relating to Marriage”.

However, the feminists in India today say that the Indian law relating to adultery is premised on the outdated notion of “marriage”. The law, according to them, is not only based on the husband’s right to fidelity of his “wife” but also treats “wife” merely as a chattel of her husband. Such a gender-discriminatory and proprietary- oriented law of “adultery”, they argue, is contrary to the spirit of the equality of status guaranteed under the Constitution of India.

“497. Adultery.—Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor.”

Section 497 unequivocally conveys that the adulteress “wife” is absolutely free from criminal responsibility. She is also not to be punished (even) for “abetting” the offence. Section 497, by necessary implication, assumes that the “wife” was a hapless victim of adultery and not either a perpetrator or an accomplice thereof. Adultery, as viewed under IPC, is thus an offence against the husband of the adulteress wife and, thereby, an offence relating to “marriage”.

It is in consonance with this approach that Section 198 CrPC mandates a court not to take cognizance of adultery unless the “aggrieved” husband makes a complaint. It runs as under:

“198. Prosecution for offences against marriage.—(1) No court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Chapter XX of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), except upon a complaint made by some person aggrieved by the offence: * * *

(2) For the purposes of sub-section (1), no person other than the husband of the woman shall be deemed to be aggrieved by any offence punishable under Section 497 or Section 498 of the said Code: Provided that in the absence of the husband, some person who had care of the woman on his behalf at the time when such offence was committed may, with the leave of the court, make a complaint on his behalf.”

Section 497 IPC read with Section 198 CrPC, thus signifies the unequal status of “husband” and “wife” in the institution of marriage in India. It declares that:

(i) man is a seducer and the married woman is merely his hapless and passive victim
(ii) he trespasses upon another man’s marital property i.e. his wife by establishing a sexual liaison with the married woman with her consent but without the consent or connivance4 of her husband (iii) husband of the adulteress wife is an aggrieved party and he (in some cases a person who had care of the married woman when the adultery was committed), therefore, is authorised to make a formal complaint
(iv) wife of the man, if he is married, who had consensual sexual intercourse with another woman, married or unmarried, is not deemed to be an aggrieved party and thereby is precluded from making a formal complaint against either her husband or the adulteress woman and
(v) a married man, with impunity, may seduce and establish sexual liaison with an unmarried woman, a widow, or a divorcee even though such a sexual link is equally potential to wreck the marriage between him and his wife.
Source : Uma challa

Posted in Articles | Leave a Comment »

Gender Equality in Indian law System

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

<b>Dowry prohibition:</b>

1) A woman and her family cannot be prosecuted for giving dowry/gifts.
2) Punishment should be given to a man and his family for accepting dowry/gifts.


1) A woman’s word is deemed to be the truth by default and a single line of complaint accusing the husband, in-laws and anyone else, is enough to arrest the accused without investigation, under a non-bailable offence.
2) A man and his relatives are presumed guilty until proven innocent and they should undergo long-drawn trials just to prove that they did not commit any offence.
3) There is no penalty for a woman filing a false complaint thereby harassing innocent people, defrauding the police and judiciary and extorting money from the husband and in-laws.

<b>Domestic violence:</b>

1) Any action of a man that is PERCEIVED by a woman to be hurting her physically, emotionally or financially will considered Domestic Violence and the woman deserves protection under law. A woman (wife or girlfriend, current or former) can also claim the man’s hard earned wealth and property even though she may not have any right,title or beneficial interest in the same.
2) Any amount of harassment and abuse by a woman committed against a man is not perceived Domestic Violence and the man does not deserve protection under law because women are the “weaker sex” and could not possibly hurt a man enough to cause physical, emotional or financial damage.

The explanation for why innocent men and their families should endure “legal terrorism” today:

1) Because it is not a bad idea (Renuka Chaudhary).
2) Because women have historically been oppressed (All radical feminists and their ignorant followers) and it is now men’s turn to suffer (Renuka Chaudhary).
3) Because our (false) statistics show that 70% married Indian women are suffering from Domestic Violence and our (fabricated) statisitcs also say that thousands of women are being burnt to death in India everyday (All radical feminists and their ignorant followers).


“The feminists in India today say that the Indian law relating to adultery is premised on the outdated notion of “marriage”. The law, according to them, is not only based on the husband’s right to fidelity of his “wife” but also treats “wife” merely as a chattel of her husband. Such a gender-discriminato ry and proprietary- oriented law of “adultery”, they argue, is contrary to the spirit of the equality of status guaranteed under the Constitution of India.”

So, how do they correct the inequality?

1) National Commission for Women (NCW) has shot down proposals for amending Section 497. Therefore, women cannot be prosecuted for adultery. They are still “hapeless victims”.

2) NCW is proposing the modification of Section 198(2) so that the wife of a man who commited adultry can now file a complaint against her husband and get him punished for adultry.

<b>This is called “gender equality”.</b>

Uma challa.

Posted in Articles | Leave a Comment »

Adultery Law Must Apply Equally To Men And Women: Justice Malimath

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

August 12, 2003 16:41 IST

Suggesting a radical change in the law on adultery, the Justice Malimath Committee for reforms in the criminal justice system has recommended amendments to provisions of the Indian Penal Code that disallow prosecution of women for the offence.

According to the present law, only a man can be prosecuted for the offence of adultery with the woman being granted immunity from proceedings on account of her position in society.
However, the Committee’s report seeks to end, what has often been referred to as the gender bias in the law, by recommending similar treatment of both men and women in such cases.

“The object of this section (Section 497 of the IPC) is to preserve the sanctity of marriage. Society abhors marital infidelity. Therefore, there is no reason for not meting out similar treatment to the wife who has sexual intercourse with a man (other than her husband),” the Committee said in its report submitted to the Centre.

It therefore suggested that “section 497 be suitably amended to the effect that whosoever has sexual intercourse with the spouse of any other person is guilty of adultery.”

The Fifth Law Commission had in 1971 recommended similar changes, though it was never implemented.

Ever since the law on adultery came into force, it has been subjected to much criticism with men crying hoarse that it amounted to gender bias and was violative of the right to equality guaranteed by the Constitution.

However, the Malimath Committee report is silent on another controversial provision of section 497, which says that prosecution in such cases shall be initiated on the complaint of the husband of the adulterous woman.

The provision was challenged in the Supreme Court with the petitioner arguing that depriving a woman of the right to proceed against an adulterous husband was a classic instance of ‘gender discrimination, legislative despotism and male chauvinism’.

However, the [b]Supreme Court did not agree.]/b]

The IPC, when in took form in 1860, was silent on the punishment for adultery with Lord Macaulay observing, “There are some peculiarities in the state of society in this country which may well lead a humane man to pause before he determines to punish the infidelity of wives.”

The circumstances he referred to included child marriage and polygamy. Macaulay, hence, advised that it would be enough to treat it as a civil injury.

However, the Second Law Commission thought otherwise and said it would not be proper to leave the offence out of the IPC and suggested that only the man be punished, again keeping in mind the condition of women in the country.

In 1951, one Yusuf Abdul Aziz challenged the constitutional validity of the provision. However, Bombay high court chief justice M C Chagla had upheld the provision saying the Constitution permitted such special legislation for women.
Source : Adultery Law Must Apply Equally To Men And Women: Justice Malimath

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Make adultery civil offence, says women’s panel

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

ADULTERY SHOULD be treated as a civil wrong and a breach of trust, and not as a criminal offence, as it is considered today by the law of the land, the National Commission for Women (NCW) has said in a recent recommendation to the government.

Girija Vyas, chairperson of NCW, told the Hindustan Times, “Lots of changes have taken place in society and accordingly the law also needs to be redefined.” “But it should be done only after a national consensus is built on the issue,” she added.

The recommendation is not binding, but it is likely to generate a debate on Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) — which makes adultery a punishable offence for men.

The NCW, which was asked to review the section, maintained there may well be instances where a woman, whose husband may have cheated on her, would still want to save her marriage.

The NCW also shot down a proposal to punish women in adulterous relationships. Currently, the law does not allow adultery charges against a woman by her husband. Vyas supported it. “Why punish the woman? She is a victim, not an offender,” she said. Considering the position of women in Indian society, the NCW took a line against making Section 497 a gender-neutral provision.

Critics of this view, however, maintain the existing provision displays a feudal mindset, implying that the wife is a personal possession of the husband, and not responsible for her actions.

The commission also recommended amendments to Section 198(2) of the CrPC, which presently does not allow the wife of an unfaithful husband to lodge a complaint against him. But the husband of a woman in an adulterous relationship is allowed to file a criminal complaint against the other man.

Source : Make adultery civil offence, says women’s panel

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Women cannot be punished for adultery

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

NEW DELHI: A woman, even if she is involved in an illicit relationship, cannot be punished for adultery and is treated as the victim under law.

And the National Commission for Women (NCW) has shot down proposals for amending Section 497 so that women can be prosecuted for adultery.

The Commission had been asked by the Centre to review Section 497 which does not envisage prosecution of the wife by the husband for adultery.

The section provides expressly that the wife shall not be punishable even as an abettor, based on the reasoning that the wife, who is involved in an illicit relationship with another man, is a victim and not the author of the crime.

According to NCW sources, the Commission does not feel that by merely prescribing punishment for women by amending Section 497, the marriage can be protected or saved.

The NCW has forwarded its recommendations to the government, in which it has stated that considering the relatively socially disempowered position of women, the Commission suggests no amendments to Section 497 of IPC.

The existing provision in the IPC is based on the mindset that the wife is a personal possession of the husband, who is the sole aggrieved person in an incident of adultery.

The Commission has, however, recommended suitable amendments to Section 198(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPRC), which as of now disqualifies the wife of an unfaithful husband from prosecuting him for his promiscuous behaviour.

It has told the government that as the wife already can take action against her husband under various other legal provisions, such as Section 498A of IPC, there is no reason that she should be debarred from initiating prosecution under Section 198 of CRPC.

The wife, in such cases, ought to be the person aggrieved and competent to file a complaint under Section 198.

In another important recommendation, the Commission has said adultery should be treated as a civil wrong and not a criminal offence.

It is of the view that there may be many instances where the woman wants to save the marriage and sees the adulterous relationship as an aberration.

The issue of adultery should be viewed as a breach of trust and be treated as a civil wrong rather than as a criminal offence.

The NCW has, however, said this should be done only after a national consensus is formed on the issue.
Source : Women cannot be punished for adultery

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Mental Disorder Ground For Nullifying Marriage: SC

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

March 21, 2006

The Supreme Court ruled today that the young age of the spouses coupled with remote possibility of procreation of children due to mental disorder of one of the spouses furnishes a good ground for nullifying the marriage.

A bench comprising Mrs. Justice Ruma Pal and Mr. Justice A.R. Lakshmanan laid down the law while setting the appellant wife free from the shackles of dead relationship which she has been living with for last 13 years.

Appellant wife Vinita Saxena, a Ph. D., was married to Pankaj Pandit on Feb.7,1993 according to Hindu rites in Delhi. The fact that the respondent husband was suffering from ‘Paranoid Schizophrenia’ and was under the constant treatment was concealed from the appellant and she was subjected to extreme cruelty by her mother-in-law and her own husband and was thrown out of her matrimonial home on July 9,1993. Since then the parties have been living separately and are involved in legal battle since 1994.

The wife sought divorce on the grounds of mental and physical cruelty and insanity of her husband.

The Supreme Court considered 11 aspects of the matrimonial relationship before coming to the conclusion that the impugned orders of the courts below have resulted in grave miscarriage of justice to the appellant who has been constrained into living with a dead relationship for over 13 years. The resultant agony and injustice that has been caused to the appellant, it is a fit case for interference under article 136 of the Constitution of India and reversal of the findings of the courts below which have resulted in grave miscarriage of justice, the apex court ruled.

The court also directed that there would be decree of divorce in favour of the appellant-wife and against the respondent husband. The order of the trial court as affirmed by the high court stands set aside. The Delhi high court vide its impugned judgment dated Sept. 10,2004 had dismissed the appeal of the wife against the trial court order dismissing her divorce petition.

The apex court considered the fact that marriage could not be consummated as the respondent was incapable of discharging his matrimonial obligations and the parties have been living separately for the last over 13 years and have not seen each other. Both the parties have crossed the point of no return and the situation between the parties would lead to an irrefutable conclusion that the appellant and the respondent can never stay as husband and wife and wife’s stay with the respondent is injurious to her health.

The relationship lasted only for four to five months, a workable solution is certainly not possible and the parties at this stage can not reconcile and forget their past as a bad dream, the apex court held.

The apex court while allowing the appeal of the wife held that it was a case of irretrievable breakdown of relationship and concluded,” The facts and circumstances of the case as well as all aspects pertain to humanity and life would give sufficient cogent reasons for us to allow the appeal and relieve the appellant from the shackles and chain of the respondent and let her live her own life, if nothing less but like a human being.” Vinita had at one stage consumed ‘baygon spray’ after having been mercilessly beaten by the respondent at the instance of his mother.

The court also noted that the trial court had failed to appreciate the uncontroverted evidence of the appellant who had proved her case on every count.

The respondent had left the court during his deposition and never returned to complete his deposition in the court and when the wife tried to discuss of the issue of insanity of the respondent, it was considered defamatory and she was mercilessly beaten up. The issue of cruelty both mental and physical has to be adjudged from the facts and circumstances of each case, the apex court observed.

Source : Mental Disorder Ground For Nullifying Marriage: SC

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Man Can Seek Divorce If Deserted By Wife For Meagre Earning: SC

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

28 September,2005

The Supreme Court has held that if a woman refuses to stay with her husband until he enhanced his earnings, the husband would be entitled to seek divorce on the ground of desertion.

Upholding a Gujarat High Court order, a bench comprising Justice Arun Kumar and Justice A K Mathur said that total abandonment of marriage could not be justified “on the ground of monetary consideration alone.” One Geeta Jagdish Mangtani, who refused to leave her teacher’s job in Bhuj to join her husband at Mumbai unless he enhanced his earnings to at least Rs 5000 per month, had moved the apex court against the High Court order confirming the decree of divorce by the trial court.

The High Court, which initially attempted to bring about a settlement, noted that the wife was not prepared to leave her job unless her husband was able to earn a handsome salary at Ulhasnagar in Mumbai so that he could look after her and their son. The husband was also not willing to leave his Rs 1400 per month-job to join her at Adipur where she was earning Rs 7000 per month as a teacher.

The High Court said in its order that it was satisfied that both husband and wife had no intention to live together and had decided to break off.

Advocate H A Raichura, appearing for Geeta, argued that since no fault divorce was not recognized under the Hindu Marriage Act, the High Court erred in granting divorce on the ground that the marriage had broken down.

Geeta, who was married to Jagdish Mangtani in November 1992, left her matrimonial home at Ulhasnagar in June 1993 and rejoined her service as a teacher at Adipur where her parents resided.

Thereafter, she never came back to Ulhasnagar even during vacations.

A son was born to the couple in November 1993 after she had left her matrimonial home.

Brushing aside the argument of Mr Raichura that his client had a reasonable cause for not joining her husband, the apex court noted that the parties knew prior to their marriage whatever they were earning.

Dismissing the appeal by the wife challenging the decree of divorce, the apex court noted that there had been no attempt on part of the wife to stay with her husband.

“In the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that this desertion on part of the wife was with a reasonable cause,” the apex court said, adding that it amounted to wilful neglect of the husband by the wife. It further stressed that monetary consideration alone could not be considered as a reasonable cause to desert.

Source : Man Can Seek Divorce If Deserted By Wife For Meagre Earning: SC

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

SC favours liberal approach in divorced cases

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

With the number of matrimonial disputes rising steadily, particularly in the cities, the Supreme Court has favoured a liberal and pragmatic approach in deciding divorce cases filed on the ground of cruelty.

Clarifying the meaning and scope of “cruelty” under the Hindu Marriage Act, the court said a liberal approach has to be adopted in dealing with various provisions under Section 13(1) of the Act and full meaning should be given to the words used by the Legislature.

Section 13(1) provides for various grounds, including cruelty, for divorce.
A Bench of Justices GP Mathur and AK Mathur said the most important factor to be considered in divorce cases was if the marriage could be saved and the husband and wife could live together happily and maintain a proper atmosphere for the upbringing of their offspring.

Quoting with approval from a case decided by the apex court in 1982, the Bench noted that “over the decades a more liberal attitude has been adopted, fostered by a recognition of the need for individual happiness of the adult parties directly involved.”

It dismissed a woman’s petition challenging an order of the Bombay High Court, which upheld the decree of divorce awarded to her husband by the Jalgaon District Judge in 2002.

However, it directed the husband, who had already married another woman and had a daughter from the second marriage, to pay Rs 8 lakh towards maintenance of his divorced wife and the son born out of the first wedlock.

Observing that the word ‘cruelty’ and the kind or degree of ‘cruelty’ which may amount to a matrimonial offence has not been defined in the Act, the court said neither actual nor presumed intention to hurt the other spouse is a necessary element in matrimonial cruelty.

The court clarified that it has to be inferred from the facts of the case, matrimonial relations of the parties and interaction in their daily life.
“Where there is proof of a deliberate course of conduct on the part of one, intended to hurt and humiliate the other spouse, and such a conduct is persisted, cruelty can easily be inferred,” the court said.

“What is cruel treatment is to a large extent a question of fact or a mixed question of law and fact and no dogmatic answer can be given to the variety of problems that arise before the court in these kinds of cases. The law has no standard by which to measure the nature and degree of cruel treatment that may satisfy the test,” it said.

Email Satya Prakash:
Source : SC favours liberal approach in divorced cases

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Wife does not have right to residence at in-laws’ house

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

NEW DELHI: Interpreting the definition of “shared household” under the law for protecting women against domestic violence, the Supreme court held that an estranged wife is entitled to residence only in the house owned or rented by her husband.

The verdict, first of its kind under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, was delivered while deciding the plea of a woman who had contended that she could not be disposed from the house which belonged to her mother-in-law and constituted as shared household under the law.

However, a bench comprising Justices SB Sinha and Markandey Katju did not agree with the contention and said it has to give a sensible interpretation of the provision to avoid chaos in society.

“No doubt, the definition of shared household in Section 2(s) of the Act is not very happily worded and appears to be the result of clumsy drafting but we have to give an interpretation that is sensible and which does not lead to chaos in society,” Justice Katju, writing the judgement for the bench, said.

It held that the “wife is entitled to claim a right to residence in a shared household which is exclusively belonging to or taken on rent by the husband or the house owned by the joint family of which the husband is a member”.

The apex court set aside the Delhi High Court verdict holding that the wife, who was facing divorce case filed by her husband, can continue to reside in the flat which is owned by her mother-in-law and not by her husband with whom she had been living in that flat.
Source : Wife does not have right to residence at in-laws’ house

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »


Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

Cuttack : 9/12 (Samaj Reporter) :

The year 2006 will come to an end after three weeks. This year, till date, there have been 51 Dowry related cases registered in Cuttack Women Police station. In these cases, a total 76 persons have been arrested out of which 58 are men and 18 are women. However, after preliminary investigation into these registered cases, it is found that there are only 10 to 12 cases that have some credence otherwise rest are “exaggeration & concocted”. Again in some cases, while the complainant woman unnecessary adds dowry charges to domestic violence.

On the other hand, like atrocities against women, there have been serious cases registered in Women Police station regarding Atrocities against Men. But as there is no Law to register cases for Men, these complaints are merely diarised. Till now there are 12 such complaints received from Men and diarised in Women Police Station. In all these 12 cases, complainant Men have described the violent torture by the women.

As the complaints by Men could not be registered for want of specific Law or Provision, the Police feels helpless. For example, a married woman in Tulsipur became a TV artist. She wants free life to live in the glamour world. Her husband is a gentleman. They have a son and a daughter. The daughter is aged 9 years. This woman reported in the Police station that she is being harassed and tortured by her husband and therefore she should be made free from her husband and two children. Having 10 years of married life, this woman would not hesitate to bring about more serious charges against her husband afterwards.

Not only this incident, like this there are many cases came to light during investigation that reveals that many women level frivolous dowry & torture charges against their husband & in-laws, just to lead a free life. To give another example, a girl under Bidanasi Station married to a Boy from Madhupatna. It is only 7 months past her marriage, this pregnant girl came to her father’s house but not returned to her husband. Now she has given a FIR in the Police Station stating that demanding 60000 rupees dowry, her husband uses to torture her. In the course of investigation, it is found that the husband is a gentleman and this girl wants to lead a free life and aborted also. The investigation in the case is continuing.

Apart from 51 Dowry related cases registered, there were 982 complaints received by Police. The Police could help in amicable settlement in 902 cases. Out of this, 150 cases could be settled in court for Divorce on mutual consent basis. Rest of the cases could be settled between the parties.

Now a Dowry Case has been registered recently. A woman got married to a person doing Oil business. The marriage took place in 1993. The woman deserted her husband after one year of marriage. After waiting for a long period for his wife, the man had to marry second time and lead his life. He has a six year old son from his second wife. Now after 13 years, the first wife who deserted the man arrived and filed a complaint with Police alleging torture by her husband for Dowry 13 years back ! What type of settlement is expected in this type of malicious cases ?

As per Law, the Police is bound to accept the complaint. What happened to the investigation will be known afterwards.

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Are our mother and sister not a ‘Women”??

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

Are our mother and sister not a ‘Women”??

Must read News and congrutaltion to Amar Ujala Team to expose the real face of Ranjana Kumari like so called social activist who openly support the legal terrorism ( Misuse of 498a) and do not respect the Supreme court instruction to stop that.

Ranjana Dadi, first stop kill our unborn sisters and stop legal terrorism.

Tell our sister’s Parents to give them the equall right for thier parental property, education instead of considering the burden and ensure that rest of the life she should depend on her husabnds money and property, instead of hiding behind the word “Dowry” and demand dowry in front of Police, judges openly from the husabnds family and cheating thier own daughter’s right.

Come the court room and show me one case where the husbands family
demand money from wives family .. in all the cases it is the dirty , money
minded girls family only openly asking dowry from husbands family.

That is the 21st century reality and you all are trying to fool the peopleand sending our mother/sister behind the bar without any investigation.

Do you think that , all the wives born in Raja Harish chandra family and allthe husbands born in criminal family?

When you say our Indian Wives have whole sale free lincence to kill our unborn sister as her on birth right , it clearly shows what type of mind set you have.

Millions of unborn sisters had been killed before thier born and you say it is right? Recal your Statement in Star News Programme.

Shame to you and it is our bad luck that women like you treated as so calledSocial activist of our coutry, who openly support to send our mother/pregentsister behind the bar without any investigations.

Are our mother and sister not a ‘Women”??
Source : Are our mother and sister not a ‘Women” ? ? [Swarup Sarkar - Delhi ]

Posted in Articles | Leave a Comment »

Refusing sex breeds domestic violence

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

Refusing sex within families breed domestic violence and there is need to report cases of sexual denials to prevent violence.

This was the message that came out of a meeting held at Mphande Teachers Development Centre in Mwanza on Monday. The meeting, organised by Non-Governmental Organisations Network was aimed at sensitising opinion leaders on the recently enacted Domestic Violence Act.

The meeting divided participants into groups and asked them to define, give examples and suggest remedies of domestic violence. All the groups came up with refusing each other sex as a major cause of domestic violence.

“Women give hassles when it comes to sex and as a result they anger their husbands,” said one of the participants, adding: “in revenge men rape, deny support and cheat on them.
Cageton Singano, officer for Mwanza police Victim Support Unit reported that out of 33 cases of domestic violence handled by his office, six were about women denying their husbands sex.

“Their excuses include fear of contracting HIV and lack of support from the husbands,” said Singano, adding, “ but we counsel such couples.”
Helix Malekano, Mwanza Police public relations officer advised men that they should avoid acting emotionally when faced with this problem.

“No two wrongs can make a right, men should report their grievances to authorities and not seek revenge,” Malekano said.

Another participant said few men report sexual abuses and other domestic violence cases because they feel embarrassed to report.

Malekano said the Domestic Violence Act would enable courts to act on any marital conflicts. The police through Victim Support Unit have officers trained and empowered to help in marriage conflicts.
Malekano then encouraged people to report abuses since a conviction on either party does not mean divorce.

“A lot of people do not report because they fear that once their partners are convicted they will get divorced.”
He also disputed allegations that the law favours women. “The law is there to protect anyone but there is a lot of emphasis on women and children because they are the most abused.”
Maclean Chimpeni, programmes manager for Mwanza ActionAid said when people got to understand the law better, they would change for fear of the punishments stipulated.
T/A Kanduku said domestic abuses, especially family matters are not a new phenomenon, and they have been there for a long time.

“We don’t tackle these issues, we just advice them first to go to their marriage counsellors, then come to traditional leaders and if the problem persists we give them letters to report to the authorities .”
During the week, the network held public meetings at Chimwalira and Kunenekude to sensitise the people on the Domestic Violence Act.
The network is made up of Association for Progressive Women, ActionAid, Cadecom, Malawi Carer, working hand in hand government through Victim Support Unit and held the meetings as part of the 16 days of Activism against gender-based violence.
Source : Refusing sex breeds domestic violence

Posted in Articles | Leave a Comment »

Women Organisation Formed to Occupy the Valuable Land

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

Women Organisation is formed by a Lady political leader to occupy the valuable land adjacent to the Road.

She formed an organistaion and occupied some government land by placing a Hut in that land on the name of Women Organisation. Adjacent to that land, she wants to occupy some more land. Tribal people are protesting that and they installed some huts in that land. Government officials took out that huts and they told tribals that they will take away that Women organistation, as it is government land. But is it going to happen?????? ?
Source : Women Organisation Formed to Occupy the Valuable Land

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

SC finds fault with Domestic Violence Act

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

In its first ever judgment under the recently notified Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Supreme Court has ruled that a wife’s claim for alternative accommodation lie only against her husband and not against in-laws and that her right to ‘shared household’ would not extend to the self-acquired property of her in-laws.

“In our opinion, the claim for alternative accommodation can only be made against the husband…,” a Bench of Justice SB Sinha and Justice Markandey Katju said dismissing the claim of a Delhi woman who had claimed her right for alternative accommodation under Section 19(1)(f) of the Act.

The Bench also interpreted the concept of ‘shared household’ under Section 17(1) of the Act. It clarified “the wife is only entitled to claim a right of residence in a shared household, and a ‘shared household’ would mean the house belonging to or taken on rent by the husband or the house which belongs to the joint family of which the husband is a member.”

The court also commented on poor drafting of Section 2(s) of the Act, which defines ‘shared household’. Terming the definition of ‘shared household’ in Section 2(s) of the Act as “not very happily worded”, the Bench said it “appears to be the result of clumsy drafting, but we have to give it an interpretation which is sensible and does not lead to chaos in society,” it observed.

The court allowed an appeal filed by the father-in-law and mother-in-law of a woman, living in the property owned by the mother-in-law, who had claimed right to residence in a shared household and also that of an alternative accommodation under the new law notified on October 26, 2006.

Under Section 17(1) of the Act, every woman in a domestic relationship shall have the right to reside in the shared household, whether or not she has any right, title or beneficial interest in the same.

Further, Section 19(1)(f) of the Act provides that a woman can seek a direction to her husband to secure same level of alternate accommodation for herself as enjoyed by her in the shared household or to pay rent for the same, if the circumstances so require.

The apex court’s ruling makes it amply clear that shared household would mean only the house belonging to the husband or taken on rent by him or the house belonging to the joint family of which he is a member. It further clarified that the wife’s claim for alternative accommodation can be made only against the husband.

Sandhya Batra was married to one Anand Batra (both names changed) on April 14, 2000 and the couple was residing at a house owned by the husband’s mother at Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi.

After Anand filed a divorce petition, Sandhya lodged dowry demand cases against her husband and in-laws including married sister-in-law and they had to visit Tihar Jail.

Initially she shifted to her parents’ residence due to the dispute but when she returned to her in-laws’ place, the house was locked. She filed a suit for getting entry to the house.

However, it was alleged that even before the suit could be decided, she, along with her parents, forcibly broke open the locks of the house at Ashok Vihar belonging to her mother-in-law. It was further alleged by her in-laws that they had to stay in their office as she terrorised them and that they finally shifted to Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad.

The trial judge granted her temporary injunction on March four 2003 and restrained her in-laws from interfering with her possession. However, the order was reversed on September 17, 2004 by the Senior Civil Judge, who held that she had no right to the properties other than those of her husband.

The Delhi High Court restored the order of the trial judge holding that “mere change of the residence by the husband would not shift the matrimonial hone from Ashok Vihar, particularly when the husband had filed a divorce petition against the wife.”

Her in-laws challenged the HC order before the SC where her counsel contended that in view of the coming into effect of the Act, she could not be dispossessed from the property in question.

Her counsel further contended that the definition of ‘shared household’ “includes a household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage had lived in a domestic relationship”.

But the apex court rejected the argument, saying if it was accepted then “it will mean that wherever the husband and wife lived together in the past that property becomes a hared household.

“It is quite possible that the husband and wife may have lived together in dozens of places e.g. with the husband’s father, husband’s paternal grand parents, his maternal parents, uncles, aunts, brothers, sisters, nephews, nieces etc.

“If the interpretation canvassed by the respondent is accepted, all these houses of the husband’s relatives will be shared households and the wife can well insist on living in all these houses of her husband’s relatives merely because she had stayed with her husband for some time in those houses in the past. Such a view would lead to chaos and would be absurd,” it said.

Allowing her in-laws’ appeal, the apex court said “the property in question in the present case neither belongs to Amit Batra nor was it taken on rent by him nor is it a joint family property of which the husband…is a member. It is the exclusive property of the appellant No 2, mother of Anand Batra. Hence it cannot be called a ‘shared household’.”
Source : SC finds fault with Domestic Violence Act

Posted in News | 1 Comment »

Renuka directs states on Domestic Violence Act

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

Days after the UNICEF commented that legislations for safeguarding women and children rights are poorly enforced, Women and Child Development minister Renuka Chowdhary said the states have been asked to constitute a separate machinery to deal with cases related to Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2006.

In a 14-point charter sent to the states, the minister has asked the states to appoint retired revenue officers, who have performed quasi-judicial functions, as magistrates to hear the cases forwarded under the new Act. “This will help in speedy redressal of cases,” she told HT on Wednesday.

The minister has also directed the states to take help of NGOs and self help women groups in identifying protection officers, as stipulated under the new law. “Many women have told our ministry that they are willing to take responsibility under the new law,” she said. The charter details the steps that states are required to take to make the new law effective for protecting women’s rights even in remote parts of the country.

The WCD ministry will soon call a meeting of representatives of the state governments to examine status of the new law. Ministry officials said that the response has been overwhelming with number of cases been registered all over the country. However, some state government are yet to notify the protection officers and magistrates to hear the complaints lodged under the Domestic Violence Act.

The law is the first legislation to check high rate of domestic violence in India. According to a United Nations report, about two-third of married women in India have been victims of domestic violence and one incident translated into a woman losing seven working days. The percentage of victims are higher in the age group of 15 to 49 years.

The State of World’s Children Report released on Tuesday had pointed that impressive legislations in India affecting women and child are poorly enforced. The child marriage law remains more on paper, the report said.

Source : Renuka directs states on Domestic Violence Act

Posted in News | Leave a Comment »

Now covert way to dowry demands

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

With the notion called ‘modernization’ being believed to have been introduced in the valley, many of us may believe that the old practices like dowry system may no longer be there. However, many of these older practices have taken a new shape to be there in the society.
Dowry system no doubt sounds like a phrase having being uttered since years and years. And the fact that this ‘social evil’ needs to be vanished remains the same. But in a society, which finds every time new different ways to keep the evil alive, let’s see how long it can be possible.
The basic thing is that today most of the families want to take dowry without getting ashamed for it. Nowadays, many of the people prefer to have tea or kehwa served for them instead of Vazwan in the would-be daughter-in-law’s home on the day of wedding, claiming that this would save much of their (bride’s parents’) money. Before putting your hands together for the applause, let’s listen to the other side of the story.
“They (his daughter’s in-laws) said very initially that they don’t want to have Vazwan to be served for the baraatees, since this is a sheer wastage of money. However, with the passage of time, they started disclosing their demands. They wanted to have the whole expected expenditure on Vazwan in cash. I had no option, but to arrange the asked amount,” reveals Gulam Hassan (name changed) of Lal Bazar locality.
“I believe, this should be termed as the modern dowry system, where one demands behind the curtains, aur jahan kehte kuch hain, karte kuch aur hain (where one speaks something, but does something else),” he feels.
Although exceptions are always there, yet many of such cases have been the same with many of the families. Like that of Gulam Hassan, Fehmida (name changed) has quite a similar tale to narrate.
Fehmida’s daughter’s in-laws had made it very clear to her family that they wanted to take only the bride along to their home; adding that nothing sort of “formality” should be done on any occasion during marriage, otherwise “it would be against their principles.” Likewise, Fehmida and her husband didn’t keep gifts with their daughter for her in-laws and their relatives on her marriage. And then, Fehmida had to pay the penalty amongst all.
“How can I forget the seventh day of the wedding of my daughter, when her brother-in-law told me on face before so many people that we have insulted him in his relatives by sending our daughter with empty hands,” recounts Fehmida, who got her daughter married last summer in quite a rich family.
“It was such an embarrassing moment for our family. He teased our common sense. My daughter came home crying. They shouldn’t have hidden their demands. It misleads you,” she adds.
Not that all families demand nothing and expect all. Many of the families do demand openly. A research, conducted earlier by Dr. Bashir Ahmed Dabla, Professor, Department of Sociology, Kashmir University, revealed that 39.49 per cent of the concerned respondents were demanded dowry from their in-laws, but 60.50 per cent were not demanded; and that the in-laws family members demanded dowry more than the husbands. The items demanded for dowry included colour T.V, car, locker, bed, wall-to-wall carpet, land, cash, golden jewelry, refrigerator, washing machine, costly clothes, watches, VCP/VCR and costly gifts.
However, on finding their demands not being fulfilled up to their expectations, whether ‘spoken’ or ‘unspoken,’ they think in terms of its compensation with their daughter-in-law’s mental peace.
The practice of burning the daughter-in-law to death is no doubt extremely rare. But nowadays mental torture of the daughters-in-law is getting quite common. Such a situation is being created for the young women, which is literally more painful than the death itself.
“I got married some twenty years back. Whatever my father could arrange for my dowry was not enough for my mother-in-law. She wanted to have car instead of motor cycle, which my father was not able to arrange. Only Allah knows, how I have spent these twenty years,” says Shaista (name changed) almost in tears.
“My every morning starts with taunts and evening ends with curses. Whenever there is a marriage of someone, I am being made listen to what the bride has brought along to her in-law’s home. Even if I prepare the best of the food, always there is found something missing. All this is not easy to tolerate, yet I am tolerating and that is only for my children,” she adds.
Even more painful situation is that of Taranum (name changed), who just after the death of her father was being taunted every other day for nobody from her parents’ home was coming there – or in other words, no one was coming with gifts and sweets to their home.
“In a situation, when my father had expired recently and there was no one except my mother in the family, how could one think in terms of formalities?” asks Taranum, adding that she would cry for her father in solitude, since her mother-in-law found it irritating.
According to the research, conducted by Dr Bashir Ahmed Dabla, 39.49 per cent of the women respondents faced torture and harassment at the hands of their in-laws family members. The major reasons identified for this also included to get maximum dowry from newly married girls. In this context, 03 out of 62 concerned women tried to kill themselves.
Many a time, the mental torture turns into the domestic violence. And taunts turn into beating.
“My in-laws have beaten me several times for not satisfying their demands. It was only after ten months of the physical torture, I dared to tell my parents,” divulges Rifat (name changed).
“Had they revealed their demands earlier, I would have not got my daughter married there. But they put across their demands only after the marriage was over,” adds her father.
This is not just the matter of the female folk, but of the major part of the society, since every girl belongs to some family and families assemble to form a society. Hence, to sort the matter out, all of us should come forward and contribute to the solution. Our contribution doesn’t demand anything, but just keeping ourselves aloof from the dowry or “modern” dowry system.

Source : Now covert way to dowry demands

Posted in Articles | Leave a Comment »

16 Days of Activism: Rutgers Sponsors Global Feminist Terrorism

Posted by 498A_Crusader on April 25, 2007

16 Days of Activism: Rutgers Sponsors Global Feminist Terrorism .
By David R. Usher (12/14/06) .

Parents might think twice about sending their children to Rutgers University. It may well be the most anti-family college in America; a training camp for global feminist terrorism.

Rutgers is home base for the Center for Women’s Global Leadership (CWGL). The CWGL is a major launch-point for global radical feminist initiatives primarily attacking well-off developing countries while virtually ignoring areas where women are truly in dire straits – such as Darfur.

The CWGL just completed the “16 days of activism against gender violence” campaign — one of several extended feminist holidays worshipping government and U.N. programs that entitle women to steal families, assets, and businesses simply by hollering “abuse”. But the theme does not end there: everything else found in the “V-dictionary”, such as abortion, welfare entitlements, HIV/AIDS, GLBT agenda, poverty, human rights congeal into one inseparable cause celebre driven by the “abuse” word.

Rutgers is an integral part of the U.N. Feminist Rumor Mill. Virtually all statistics and conclusions feminists make have been scientifically proven to be fantastical.

In fact, the body of assertions made in the U.N. Secretary Generals Report on Violence Against Women were so outrageous that the U.N. Third Committee voted unanimously to only “note” the report, rather than accept it. In parliamentary language, this is a full rejection — a rare event at the United Nations.

For example, radical activists claimed that “70 percent of married women in India were victims of beatings or rape”. After much research, Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR) found this was based on a graphic in a UNPF report that was obviously mislabeled and meaningless. Yet, this claim is the lead item on virtually every feminist website around the world.

In fact, there are so few truly scientific claims made in any of the U.N. or CWGL documents, we can say the expenditure of federal and international monies has been spent, in majority, on social terrorism of foreign countries.

I realize this is a breathtaking statement to make. As always, I back my statements up thoroughly. Now, we will examine recent events in India, which was recently conquered by the feminist insurgency, and is just starting to realize what happened.

Destruction of Marriage in India

In India, the words “dowry death” or “bride burning” conjure up horrible images that can be misused to fool legislators into passing anything. That is precisely what happened.

India’s new IPC 498a law permits any woman to claim dowry abuse – causing government to swing into action as if Bin Laden just waltzed into the White House. On mere allegation alone, her husband and members of his will be incarcerated. Bail can be optionally granted only by a judge. Incarceration prior to the initial bail hearing is often several months, depending on how much the woman’s family greases the palms of police or magistrate. Trials take between three and six years to be heard, during which the individuals arrested are subject to constant harassment and blackmail.

India did not stop there. Feminists harassed legislators into passing the most outrageous domestic violence law anywhere in the world.

The new Indian domestic violence law goes far beyond anything in Western law. “Not providing money for maintaining you or your children” and “not paying rent” are now crimes in India. This criminalization of poverty insanely thrusts poor families into more desperate straits than before: two households must be sustained on the same income. Literally any domestic disagreement, no matter how minor, now invokes destruction of the family in India.

The excesses of these new laws are apparent and intuitively predictable. You do not have to take my word for it. Ex-wives are blaming the domestic violence law for making their lives worse. Police say that about 80% of dowry allegations are false. Ajaib Singh, head of the Women and Child Support Unit in Chandigarh, reports that only 20% of dowry claims are genuine.

Shantosh Singh, chairperson of Women Welfare Counselling Cell at Sector 17, reveals the truth: ‘‘People generally make use this law to facilitate a divorce. And often, it’s the lawyers who advise the women to implicate their in-laws under the provisions of this Act,’’

Indian lawyers admit the truth, too. ‘There are only 10 per cent cases based on truth, and people usually come to us and ask specifically to mention the element of dowry in their divorce petitions,’’

The Times of India was inundated with letters to the editor about horrendous legal abuses – classified by the newspaper as “A legal tool to earn quick money”. has quite a collection of articles documenting many instances of intentional organized human rights abuses.

India’s Supreme Court quickly recognized the problem. It described the new Dowry law as “legal terrorism”, but surprisingly lacked the mettle to rule the law unconstitutional. As in America, what lines the pockets of lawyers is unlikely to be stopped by courts.

Why is “legal terrorism” endemic in India? It is all about money. The laws entitle a woman to make a false allegation to lock up her spouse and members of his family, and terrorize them for years, so his family has to pay her a very large “reverse dowry” to drop the charges. Once the charges are dropped, she is in full control of the family. He is summarily ejected from society in divorce court, his career possibly ruined. Also, he is used as another number to beef up crime statistics.

Here a the sickening results of the feminist invasion of India. Of 58319 dowry cases in 2004, 134,757 individuals were incarcerated. Of these, 24,127 have been acquitted, and only 5,739 convicted. The rest are still “in limbo” living under the ragged sword of feminism. This suggests that up to 95.8% of dowry cases in India are, in fact, cases of terrorist blackmail.

Even companies are vulnerable. Recently, a wife accused a husband of domestic violence, and filed suit against his employer, WiPro, for “ruining her marriage” due to a “dating allowance” they were allegedly giving her husband. Since the company does not provide “dating allowances”, she dropped the charge, but continues to sue the company for ruining her marriage anyway.

Like Al Qaeda, feminist terrorists will go to any length to seize control of entire countries. An article published on November 30th by, as part of Rutgers activism campaign, still pretends that women will experience abuse rates of up to 70% (despite retraction by the Washington Times on November 28th, and full rejection by the U.N. Third Committee on November 22nd).

From a high-level perspective, we see that the purpose of these “laws” is to seize money and establish imperial matriarchy in up-and-coming export-positive developing countries. This is why we do not see feminists marching on Darfur, where there is no money to be taken.

Studying the feminist invasion of India is instructive. It is easier to recognize that the “domestic violence” cabal is, in fact, a terrorist network when we view the treachery inflicted on other countries.

America is a primary source of this form of terrorism. People I met personally in countries such as China, Japan, Singapore, Korea, and India are all too aware of it. America is funding this invasion via federal entitlements, and is substantially responsible for it. We must stop exporting legal terrorism to developing countries in the name of “democracy”. We are losing friends around the world, some of whom will predictably become enemies with bombs on their backs.

History suggests that radical destruction of marriage and family is far more endemic and destructive than any of the human rights issues feminists complain about in their diatribes.

America must stop funding all radical organizations and programs destroying families globally. American domestic violence laws, such as the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), and Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) must be fully rewritten to be gender-neutral, require that agencies unequivocally provide full assistance to anyone who requests it, and require solid evidentiary proof before legal artillery is fired.

Mark Twain once said “A lie can travel half-way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes”. After a decade of Violence Against Women Act abuses, the truth now wears Army boots. The lie stops right here, and so does the buck.

David R. Usher

David R. Usher is President of the American Coalition for Fathers and Children, Missouri Coalition

Send Feedback To David R. Usher:
Source : 16 Days of Activism: Rutgers Sponsors Global Feminist Terrorism

Posted in Articles | 1 Comment »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 169 other followers