CHANDIGARH: Backtracking on dowry allegations in court proved costly for a woman as she got entangled in her own web of lies, following which, a
show-cause notice was served to her for giving false evidence.
According to information, the Sector-25 based woman had levelled dowry charges against her 27-year-old husband, a resident of Sector 51, in May 2007.
In her police complaint, the woman alleged that soon after she got married, her husband started misbehaving and using derogatory language with her for bringing insufficient dowry.
She also alleged that she was thrashed and locked up in rooms on several occasions.
Subsequently, a case under sections 406 (punishment for criminal breach of trust) and 498-A (husband or relative of a husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the IPC was registered against her husband on July 5, 2007.
However, the case took a new turn when during the court hearing on Monday, the complainant outright denied that she was harassed or maltreated by her husband or her in-laws.
The woman went on to state that a 'misunderstanding' had cropped up between the couple, due to which her relations turned sour with the in-laws, resulting in the two getting divorced.
Much to the surprise of the jury, the woman's parents also supported her statement and denied that she was never maltreated or harassed by her husband and his family.
Shocked at the turn of events, the prosecution declared the complainant hostile, while the judicial magistrate questioned her why she shouldn't be punished for giving false evidence in the court?
The magistrate in his judgment stated, "The complainant deliberately suppressed the truth and made a false statement knowing it could be used in the court proceedings. This clearly amounts to perjury."
He further said, "The complainant should be tried for giving false evidence in legal proceedings. A show-cause notice must be served to her under Section 344 of the CrPC, wherein she must explain why she should not be punished. Separate proceedings must be also initiated against her."
Meanwhile, the court acquitted the woman's husband by giving him the benefit of doubt.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
LIVE-IN RELATIONS - THE aasaan raasta
You can not afford to be more foolish to MARRY , if u born as an Indian male.
The practical situation is " IF BORN IN INDIA - DO NOT MARRY"
STATS OF LIVE-IN RELATIONS IN INDIA
Due to fear of 498a,DV all these biased laws following are the stats of living relations increased rather than marriage in Mumbai
Even you can find advertisements also on the nets,newspapers& hoardings & slogan is
"Bewkoof mat bano ,,asaan rasta chuno"
IN 2004 : 5479 people out of 1 lac
In 2007 : 23788 people out of 1 lac
In 2009 :118940 people out of 1.5 lac
The practical situation is " IF BORN IN INDIA - DO NOT MARRY"
STATS OF LIVE-IN RELATIONS IN INDIA
Due to fear of 498a,DV all these biased laws following are the stats of living relations increased rather than marriage in Mumbai
Even you can find advertisements also on the nets,newspapers& hoardings & slogan is
"Bewkoof mat bano ,,asaan rasta chuno"
IN 2004 : 5479 people out of 1 lac
In 2007 : 23788 people out of 1 lac
In 2009 :118940 people out of 1.5 lac
PATHETIC INDIAN JUSTICE SYSTEM
A seven-year-old has been charged in a dowry case in Bihar.
Santosh, a class four student has paid the price for a crime he did not commit.
"They framed me in a dowry case. I study in class 4. Police came to my house and asked for money. They threatened to send me to Munger otherwise," he said.
Santosh was named in a dowry harassment case last year along with his parents and his elder brother.
His parents and brother got bail after his father reached a compromise with the complainant. But given Santosh's tender age, the court didn't pass any specific bail order in his name.
Santosh's lawyer says there were serious lapses in the way the case was handled.
"The age of none of the accused has been mentioned in the entire case diary," said Vijay Maharaj.
Police admit they made a mistake but say the witnesses in the case had a role to play.
"None of the witnesses mentioned that the accused is under age. I agree that we have made a mistake in this case," said Amit Lodha, SP, Begusarai.
Police say Santosh can breathe easy irrespective of the outcome of the case. But this comes as cold comfort for someone who has learnt a bitter lesson so early in life.
Santosh, a class four student has paid the price for a crime he did not commit.
"They framed me in a dowry case. I study in class 4. Police came to my house and asked for money. They threatened to send me to Munger otherwise," he said.
Santosh was named in a dowry harassment case last year along with his parents and his elder brother.
His parents and brother got bail after his father reached a compromise with the complainant. But given Santosh's tender age, the court didn't pass any specific bail order in his name.
Santosh's lawyer says there were serious lapses in the way the case was handled.
"The age of none of the accused has been mentioned in the entire case diary," said Vijay Maharaj.
Police admit they made a mistake but say the witnesses in the case had a role to play.
"None of the witnesses mentioned that the accused is under age. I agree that we have made a mistake in this case," said Amit Lodha, SP, Begusarai.
Police say Santosh can breathe easy irrespective of the outcome of the case. But this comes as cold comfort for someone who has learnt a bitter lesson so early in life.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
SC scared of RTI Act.
This itself shows their insecurity!
If they do everything in the correct way, then why are they afraid of making
the process transparent for the citizens to audit? How can asking for any
information be treated as an interference, unless there's something which is
going to be exposed?
------------------------------------------------------------------
New Delhi: An appeal from the Supreme Court to itself may sound odd but its
unease with CIC’s orders has pushed the apex court to exercise the unusual
option. The SC moved the SC on Monday with appeals challenging orders of the
Central Information Commission
(CIC) asking it to divulge details relating to appointment of judges and
correspondence between the Chief Justice of India and Justice R Regupathy of
Madras HC on the alleged interference of a Union minister in a court case.
It had earlier moved the Delhi high court questioning a CIC order
directing opening up of information relating to declaration of assets by SC
judges. The appeal has been filed in the SC because of the feeling that the
apex court, being the final arbiter, should lay down guidelines on
applicability of RTI Act to matters relating to administration of justice.
Assailing the direction to make public information which were available
only with the CJI, the apex court in its two petitions, settled by attorney
general G E Vahanvati and drafted by advocate Devdatt Kamat, said the CJI
held the information pertaining to appointment of judges in a fiduciary
capacity, and hence it should be exempted from being made public under
Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act.
The short-cut taken by the apex court’s central principal information
officer (CPIO) in moving the SC instead of the normal course of approaching
the HC, is sure to raise eyebrows. The CPIO said it decided to come straight
to the SC because this is an issue of farreaching consequences and
substantial questions of law of general public interest, which have to be
ultimately and conclusively determined by the Supreme Court itself as the
top court of the country.
In one appeal, it challenged the CIC order directing SC to give details
of the decision not recommending the elevation of Justice A P Shah, Chief
Justice of Delhi HC, to SC even as the collegium headed by the CJI suggested
names of Chief Justices of four other HCs for appointment to the apex court.
In the second appeal, it sought setting aside of the CIC order asking SC
to furnish details to RTI applicant S C Agrawal of the correspondence
between the CJI and Justice R Regupathy of Madras HC on the incident in the
court in Chennai when the judge had alleged that a Union minister had tried
to influence him in a case pertaining to grant of anticipatory bail to a
person.
*Questions of law raised by the SC CPIO in both the appeals:
*Whether RTI applicant has a right to information relating to
appointment of judges under Section 2(J) of RTI Act
Whether the principles of independence of judiciary demand that the
functioning of judiciary should not be interfered with by ‘strangers and
busybodies’
If they do everything in the correct way, then why are they afraid of making
the process transparent for the citizens to audit? How can asking for any
information be treated as an interference, unless there's something which is
going to be exposed?
------------------------------------------------------------------
New Delhi: An appeal from the Supreme Court to itself may sound odd but its
unease with CIC’s orders has pushed the apex court to exercise the unusual
option. The SC moved the SC on Monday with appeals challenging orders of the
Central Information Commission
(CIC) asking it to divulge details relating to appointment of judges and
correspondence between the Chief Justice of India and Justice R Regupathy of
Madras HC on the alleged interference of a Union minister in a court case.
It had earlier moved the Delhi high court questioning a CIC order
directing opening up of information relating to declaration of assets by SC
judges. The appeal has been filed in the SC because of the feeling that the
apex court, being the final arbiter, should lay down guidelines on
applicability of RTI Act to matters relating to administration of justice.
Assailing the direction to make public information which were available
only with the CJI, the apex court in its two petitions, settled by attorney
general G E Vahanvati and drafted by advocate Devdatt Kamat, said the CJI
held the information pertaining to appointment of judges in a fiduciary
capacity, and hence it should be exempted from being made public under
Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act.
The short-cut taken by the apex court’s central principal information
officer (CPIO) in moving the SC instead of the normal course of approaching
the HC, is sure to raise eyebrows. The CPIO said it decided to come straight
to the SC because this is an issue of farreaching consequences and
substantial questions of law of general public interest, which have to be
ultimately and conclusively determined by the Supreme Court itself as the
top court of the country.
In one appeal, it challenged the CIC order directing SC to give details
of the decision not recommending the elevation of Justice A P Shah, Chief
Justice of Delhi HC, to SC even as the collegium headed by the CJI suggested
names of Chief Justices of four other HCs for appointment to the apex court.
In the second appeal, it sought setting aside of the CIC order asking SC
to furnish details to RTI applicant S C Agrawal of the correspondence
between the CJI and Justice R Regupathy of Madras HC on the incident in the
court in Chennai when the judge had alleged that a Union minister had tried
to influence him in a case pertaining to grant of anticipatory bail to a
person.
*Questions of law raised by the SC CPIO in both the appeals:
*Whether RTI applicant has a right to information relating to
appointment of judges under Section 2(J) of RTI Act
Whether the principles of independence of judiciary demand that the
functioning of judiciary should not be interfered with by ‘strangers and
busybodies’
Sunday, November 29, 2009
BLOWING THE LAW IN AIR ..TRUTH OF NRI GUYS & MARRIAGE !!
As Extracted from a Hindustan Times Newspaper Article:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/lifestyle-news/newdelhi/Of-runaway-wives-amp-harassed-husbands/Article1-481196.aspx
Of runaway wives & harassed husbands
There has been a spurt in cases of runaway wives who have slapped criminal cases
against their non-resident Indian (NRI) husbands.
And, often, the men can do little to gain custody of their children.
Though the police in countries such as the US, UK and Canada often press child
abduction charges in such cases, they cannot follow them up in India, as the
country has not yet ratified the 1980 Hague Convention.
"We hope it may be possible for India to ratify this in the near future," said a
spokesperson for the British High Commission in Delhi.
"Since India has not signed the Hague Convention, courts here have not really
been enforcing judgments of foreign courts," said senior advocate Pinky Anand,
who represented complainant V. Ravi Chandran, on whose petition the Supreme
Court ordered the CBI to trace his son and former wife in India.
The Hague Convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction is a
multilateral treaty that provides a speedy method to return a child taken from
one member nation to another.
The convention was drafted to "insure the prompt return of children who have
been abducted from their country of habitual residence or wrongfully retained in
a contracting state not their country of habitual residence".
"India has been used as a haven or a refuge where you could defeat the law.
Moreover, dowry laws are peculiar to the Indian legal system," said Anand.
"Hopefully, this judgement would pave the way for foreign judgements to be
enforced in India."
The Canadian High Commission told HT that its "consular officers at the
department of foreign affairs and international trade and in India were
currently managing 23 child custody, child abduction and child welfare cases".
More than 60 such cases have been reported from the US — over a dozen of them in
the last three months alone.
"Parental child abduction can cause immense distress to both the child that has
been taken and the family they leave behind," the British High Commission
spokesperson said. "The British government is limited in the assistance it can
provide as decisions concerning custody and country of abode need to be taken by
the courts."
The British High Commission said it was aware of 11 cases in the past 12 months
involving British nationals where a parent had either abducted a minor son or
daughter to India or retained him or her after a holiday visit.
"Cases are sometimes filed to blackmail and extort money," said criminal lawyer
Tarun Goomber, citing the example of a man who could not come to India to meet
his parents as arrests warrants had been issued against him after his wife filed
a case.
"Some cases of this sort have come to our notice," said a senior official of the
Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs, on condition of anonymity. "But the
government cannot do much as it doesn't have the jurisdiction." Anand said at
times such cases were used "as a tool to pressurise the other side, prevent a
person from coming back to the country and make the other party give in".
http://www.hindustantimes.com/lifestyle-news/newdelhi/Of-runaway-wives-amp-harassed-husbands/Article1-481196.aspx
Of runaway wives & harassed husbands
There has been a spurt in cases of runaway wives who have slapped criminal cases
against their non-resident Indian (NRI) husbands.
And, often, the men can do little to gain custody of their children.
Though the police in countries such as the US, UK and Canada often press child
abduction charges in such cases, they cannot follow them up in India, as the
country has not yet ratified the 1980 Hague Convention.
"We hope it may be possible for India to ratify this in the near future," said a
spokesperson for the British High Commission in Delhi.
"Since India has not signed the Hague Convention, courts here have not really
been enforcing judgments of foreign courts," said senior advocate Pinky Anand,
who represented complainant V. Ravi Chandran, on whose petition the Supreme
Court ordered the CBI to trace his son and former wife in India.
The Hague Convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction is a
multilateral treaty that provides a speedy method to return a child taken from
one member nation to another.
The convention was drafted to "insure the prompt return of children who have
been abducted from their country of habitual residence or wrongfully retained in
a contracting state not their country of habitual residence".
"India has been used as a haven or a refuge where you could defeat the law.
Moreover, dowry laws are peculiar to the Indian legal system," said Anand.
"Hopefully, this judgement would pave the way for foreign judgements to be
enforced in India."
The Canadian High Commission told HT that its "consular officers at the
department of foreign affairs and international trade and in India were
currently managing 23 child custody, child abduction and child welfare cases".
More than 60 such cases have been reported from the US — over a dozen of them in
the last three months alone.
"Parental child abduction can cause immense distress to both the child that has
been taken and the family they leave behind," the British High Commission
spokesperson said. "The British government is limited in the assistance it can
provide as decisions concerning custody and country of abode need to be taken by
the courts."
The British High Commission said it was aware of 11 cases in the past 12 months
involving British nationals where a parent had either abducted a minor son or
daughter to India or retained him or her after a holiday visit.
"Cases are sometimes filed to blackmail and extort money," said criminal lawyer
Tarun Goomber, citing the example of a man who could not come to India to meet
his parents as arrests warrants had been issued against him after his wife filed
a case.
"Some cases of this sort have come to our notice," said a senior official of the
Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs, on condition of anonymity. "But the
government cannot do much as it doesn't have the jurisdiction." Anand said at
times such cases were used "as a tool to pressurise the other side, prevent a
person from coming back to the country and make the other party give in".
Friday, November 13, 2009
DULHA YA BAKRA?
Dulha ya Bakra? (Bridegroom or Scapegoat)
How do I start telling about a sad and bitter story that I have just narrowly escaped, but have found other unfortunate brethrens that got duped? Should I present it as my story and use the sympathy gained from readers to nurse my own insignificant wounds or should I report it as a story of an actual victim as a third person and stay objective?
I had heard word ‘Bakra’ being used again and again by few of my wife’s girlfriends in a small gathering that my wife hosted shortly after our marriage to introduce me to all her special friends. I never understood the giggles that inevitably followed. We all were Vegetarians, so what was this “Bakra” all about?
As a member of growing Indian Diaspora in Western countries, you may have heard about or known young professionally qualified men, who after arriving from India have quickly ascended into secure and well paid jobs to establish themselves into acceptable standards in foreign lands. Such Indian men are popularly referred to as FOB (Fresh off the Boat). They are pride of India and pride of the land that have chosen to reside in.
You may have also come across few young Indian men who were born and brought up in foreign lands, in a land that was adopted by their forefathers. This group of young men is popularly referred to as ABCD (American/Australian Born Confused Desi).
Irrespective of whether a guy is FOB or ABCD, at some stages in his life, he starts (or is persuaded to) searching for his life partner, a perfect quintessential woman!
Directly or indirectly his attention is drawn to large number of educated and qualified brides from India. Perhaps, you have actively participated in conversations that discuss relative merits of matrimonial websites that specialise in servicing young brides and grooms of Indian Origin.
Whether the guy is still a NRI with significant roots still back in India or he is citizen (Permanently Resident) of the land that he is now living in, he will usually browse through matrimonial advertisements appearing in Indian and local papers and increasingly on the internet sites.
But, does he know of the dangers that are lurking just beneath the surface for getting married to girls from India?
If he is naïve and gullible (like I once was), he will foresee no problems whatsoever. After all, he is well established in a foreign land and has some strength to support the woman that he is hoping to bring into his life. Moreover, his prospective bride is also going to have sort of standards. She will also be a professional and when given a chance, she will also carve out her own success story. So, what is the problem?
In one phrase, the answer is “IPC 498A”. Yep, read it again, “IPC 498A”. That one phrase can become a problem that is big enough to drive many a successful men of Indian origin to commit suicide. This is the price that these unfortunate men pay for their overseas success.
To those of you who have never heard of this phrase, it stands for “Indian Penal Code 498A”. As you may have surmised by now, “IPC 498A” is some sort of Indian law. It is a full family nightmare for those who do get trapped.
Very few men come out of IPC 498A unscathed. Most come out after having lost major portion of what they had been working for. Few come out with virtually nothing but the clothes that they were wearing. Few become angry and stay that way for rest of their lives. Few become insane or suffer from life long diseases. Few get branded and are levelled with worst terrorists of the world. Those who are not prepared to face any of this, succumb to the comfort of committing suicide.
“What the heck is IPC 498A?” Is that what I heard you ask?
Well, my fellow married or unmarried Men, watch out for this one!!!
Another name for IPC 498A is “CRUELTY BY HUSBAND AND RELATIVES”.
From what is haphazardly documented, IPC 498A was drafted by esteemed Government of India to counter the growing problem in India wherein young brides and married women that were being harassed and tortured. Purportedly, the reason for this cruelty towards women was to extort money from her parents or her relatives. And the obvious perpetrators were husband and his family members. The IPC 498A was drafted to combat any and all such cruel husbands and serve them with a swift Justice.
AHA! So you say, they deserve it! It is a miraculous that Indian government came up with a law that could provide swift justice.
But what does a torturing Indian husband have to do with a man who is not living in India? After all, the latter is a professional, who is generally well educated and surely he would not stoop down to level that may be perceived as cruelty.
Answer as it turns out is “EVERYTHING!!”
As a child, I used to hear of phrases such as “Beauty is in the eye of beholder”; “Rose by any other name would smell just as sweet”.
From the lens of IPC 498A, “Cruelty is in the eye of beholder too”.
IPC 498A allows any married woman (Marriage has to be considered as legitimate in India) to approach the police in India and make a complaint that her husband and/or his family is being cruel towards her. In lot of cases, she does not even have to give a written complaint. Her oral testimony is considered true. After all, there have been no women in India, who can lie. The oral statement provided by the grieving woman is noted down by an obliging police officer. Once this formality is completed, her testimony is considered to be a part of “State Witness”. Depending upon the relative shrewdness of the complaining woman or the police officer taking her complaint, the focus quickly shifts towards the assets that are owned by the husband and his family. The poor tortured woman is entitled to complain of being harassed by more than one individual from her husband’s family irrespective of that person’s age, gender or health.
After the complaining process is finished, the woman is free to go wherever she chooses. She is a “STATE WITNESS”. She does not have to make herself available again.
Thus, you may have gathered that Indian Government has made it is extremely easy for any married woman to make a complaint. Alas! Perhaps you have had more experience than Government of India that some women can speak lie too.
Judging from the statistics of past few years of IPC 498A (shown in a table that will be shortly attached), it seems that 98% of women in India who have made complaints under IPC 498A have resorted to various degrees of lie. Perhaps, the magnitude and intensity of lie uttered by a woman depends upon the upbringing and family values that she was taught as a little girl.
Remember, I said that “IPC 498A” was designed to serve swift justice. In a policy that is akin to “Shoot first, Verify identity later (if at all)” philosophy, IPC 498A allows Indian Police to promptly prepare arrest warrants for everyone that is named in the woman’s complaint.
The most startling aspect of the IPC 498A arrest warrants is that the Indian bureaucratic machinery responsible for preparing them somehow manages to conclude bulk of their task on Friday afternoon! So, everyone who is named in the complaint under IPC 498A gets arrested on Friday evening. Since the courts are not fully operational on Saturday and Sunday, most of the people who are arrested spend their weekend inside a police lockup. Most usually get bails by Monday or Tuesday to be released from custody of Police, but bail is after all a bail. It is essentially a virtual arrest wherein you have freedom to move about instead of being locked up one place.
Constant presence of young and successful NRI men eagerly browsing the matrimonial websites to search for their life partners in India completes the picture. While the Indian law in itself does not seem to discriminate against NRI, the prospective brides, her family and the Police certainly seem to have a formula that is well suited to a NRI.
A NRI man may find that shortly after his marriage, his newly wed wife from India is behaving very differently from what she used to. She has generally become more demanding and gets too angry too fast. He may try to reason with her or perhaps consider sending her back to India.
Maybe, she is too depressed by having seen overseas life with all its gloss removed, or she had a boy-friend back in India that her parents did not approve of. Each woman had unique set of reasons and the sentiments towards her marriage. It becomes a problem if a woman was unscrupulous to start with or she can be talked into making an IPC 498A complaint. If she is born and bred in Urban India, she may be bold enough to do it herself.
There are police stations in India that specialise in providing ready made typed IPC 498A complaint documents that only need to be read out by the woman, since many still do not know on how and what to complain about. She is encouraged to add the relatives of husband who are living locally.
What if she is not prepared to read, “No problems, Ma’am!” There will usually be some member of police force, who, on behalf of the woman will be eager to read out her complaints/ self experiences from an already typed document.
It was extremely puzzling to read that almost all the NRI from Northern India were accused of holding and dragging their estranged wife by her hair while brethren from South were accused of beating her with his footwear. The repetitive violence stories were as puzzling as they were unsettling. Surely the Indian men had to have some variations on how they had abused their ex-wives. You could predict what was going to be in paragraph 5 of the complaint solely based upon the men’s name in paragraph 1. This enigma was solved after the discovery of ready made 498A complaint sheets. The BEST example of Indian supportiveness and “Indian Ingenuity, Global Impact”!
The woman is advised by police to not contact her husband or his family until all the paperwork is ready. After the paperwork is ready, she is advised to contact them and to make her specific demands known giving them extremely short time to comply. If they do not agree, the police swings into action and makes few arrests. The hell breaks lose.
If a husband is overseas when he comes to know of this, he has two options. First is to immediately succumb to his wife’s demands. It is a price that he has to pay to free members of his family who are in jail. He may attempt to fly to India to sort out the mess. He usually has no idea that he is headed directly into jail. Once, in India, he may be arrested on bail and cannot go back to his normal country of residence. His passport is taken away to ensure this. He has to stay until his trial is heard. In that case, he loses his job, his car, his house, etc…
The easiest way out of this predicament is to settle with his wife, which usually means that he has to pay her (or her family) large sum of money. The fact that he’d also be signing a divorce papers is a certainty. After he has been fleeced, he is free to go back to his foreign country so as to nurse his wounds or earn money to pay off the loan that he had to take to buy his freedom.
These men are perhaps the luckiest (sorry!!! least unfortunate) in terms of actual injuries. Unless you consider the fact that he will now be carrying his silent and unspoken wounds and emotional scars of being scammed for rest of his life.
It progressively gets worse for the rest. Those who are smart enough to stay overseas and choose to fight with the complaint of wife have to put up with extremely slow court machinery of India. The actual case of 498A is likely to see trial after 7 years in waiting. In all those 7 years, he, his parents and his relatives are under bail (arrest without being in jail).
Perhaps, those who do not have any family in India, or those whose wife did not name anyone other than the husband are less unfortunate. You might be inclined to think that, but you are wrong.
For a woman with some clout and police who are determined to get him, they have an option of Interpol. Police can issue an Interpol “Red Corner Notice” for such people. Interpol alert as you may already know is usually reserved for hardened criminals such as serial murderers, terrorists and drug dealers.
I have heard about a brilliant and successful software programmer (only child of his parents) who initially tried to hide somewhere in USA after his beloved wife put him on Interpol red corner notice for him. She had gone to India for her sister’s wedding and never came back to him. She went to Police to claim that her husband had asked for Rs. 1,00,000/- from her parents! The husband used to work in a large multinational before he got listed on Interpol, from which he was sacked as soon as his American manager came to know of his Interpol status. No sane company will want to hire a person who is branded akin to a terrorist. It took him over 6 months to realize what he had been dealt with only to be shot by a vigilant US police officer who recognized him. His father succumbed to heart attack shortly after his son’s death. His mother is not so lucky. She is still alive and locked up in a mental hospital chanting either “My husband did not ask for Rs. 1,00,000!!!” or “Give me Rs. 1,00,000, I need to send that to USA to bring my son back to life”. Her Doctors think that her son was a terrorist who was killed by US Police and he probably was involved in September 2001 attacks.
What happened to his former wife? She was never called to any court or police station again. After maintaining silence for about 5 years, she finally confessed that no one had asked her for any money, but she was upset with her husband who had refused to buy her a Lexus and was only prepared to spend for Honda. She cried openly. Was it for the turmoil that she had caused or was it for the car that she never got to drive?
Watch out my fellow unmarried brothers, after few meaningless affairs, this beautiful and charming young woman is back on internet marriage market. She has now grown wiser and is currently looking for “well educated, smart, successful and down to earth NRI Dulha”.
Or shall I say “Bakra”?
Monday, October 5, 2009
TRUTH OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA
Recently I was in debate with a friend that in India we are even devoid of our Basic Human Rights. However after the discussion we found we are wrong. All the citizens of India , including people grieved by the 498A /DV etc. enjoy all the 30 basic Human Rights as per the Guidelines
of UNO.
Oh ! there are minor modifications though , as given below.
Human Right 1. We are all free and equal. We are all born free. We all have our
own thoughts and ideas. We should all be treated in the same way.
Indian Modification:
You are free to think whatever you want. But the government and the
judiciary are also free to treat you the way they want. We are all equal, equal
to animals.
Human Right 2. Don't discriminate. These rights belong to everybody, whatever
our differences.
Indian Modification:
The govt. and courts are not discriminating. They are treating you in
the same way they treat hardcore criminals and terrorists-GUILTY, TILL YOU BRIBE
Human Right 3. The right to life. We all have the right to life, and to live in
freedom and safety.
Indian Modification:
Of course you have got the right to life. What if the life is a hell for
you?
Human Right 4. Slavery â€" past and present. Nobody has any right to make us a
slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.
Indian Modification:
Who says we are treated like slaves? Even slaves get better treatment.
Human Right 5. Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.
Indian Modification:
In India torture is defined as when someone dies in police
custody.Nothing prior to that is cruelty.
Human Right 6. We all have the same right to use the law. I am a person just
like you!
Indian Modification:
Of course you can use law. But LAW is an extinct species in India?
Human Right 7. We are all protected by the law. The law is the same for
everyone. It must treat us all fairly.
Indian Modification:
Law protects us all. While wives get protection in your houses, you get
the same in jail.
Human Right 8. Fair treatment by fair courts. We can all ask for the law to
help us when we are not treated fairly.
Indian Modification:
You are treated fairly. Ask the courts. Whether you are treated fairly
or not is to be decided by the courts. Whether courts are fair or not is also to
be decided by courts.Courts have already granted you so many reliefs by
forgiving your life.
Human Right 9. Unfair detainment. Nobody has the right to put us in prison
without a good reason and keep us there, or to send us away from our country.
Indian Modification:
Courts are not sending you in prison without good reason. Don’t you
think a matter of several lacs of rupees a reason good enough for sending you to
prison?
Human Right 10. The right to trial. If we are put on trial this should be in
public. The people who try us should not let anyone tell them what to do..
Indian Modification:Still want more trial?
Human Right 11. Innocent until proven guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing
something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the
right to show it is not true.
Indian Modification:
Implemented in India in slightly different way. You are innocent till
you marry.
Human Right 12. The right to privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name.
Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters or bother us or our
family without a good reason.
Indian Modification:
In this age of transparency and right to information implemented on the
bureaucracy , how can you cattle citizens expect right to privacy.
Human Right 13. Freedom to move. We all have the right to go where we want in
our own country and to travel as we wish.
Indian Modification:
Yes. That’s why courts want you to travel from one state to another
defending your cases
Human Right 14. The right to asylum. If we are frightened of being badly treated
in our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be
safe.
Indian Modification:
Indeed the govt want you all to leave the country and settle abroad by
hook or crook. That’s why they treat you badly. Another reason for flourishing
"kabbootarbazi " business.
Human Right 15. The right to a nationality. We all have the right to belong to a
country.
Indian Modification:
You have right to call yourself an Indian. So you deserve all the bad
treatment as an Indian.
Human Right 16. Marriage and family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and
have a family if they want to. Men and women have the same rights when they are
married, and when they are separated.
Indian Modification:
STRICT Advice: Either don’t marry or don’t get separated after
marriage.
Human Right 17. Your own things. Everyone has the right to own things or share
them. Nobody should take our things from us without a good reason.
Indian Modification:
Of course you have a right to own things. But in India its your duty to
share them also including your hard-earned money, property and even wife with
police and judges.
Human Right 18. Freedom of thought. We all have the right to believe in what we
want to believe, to have a religion, or to change it if we want.
Indian Modification:
You also have a right to change your sex from male to female. Should
all men do that? Perhaps feminists want this.
Human Right 19. Free to say what you want. We all have the right to make up our
own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas
with other people.
Indian Modification:
Of course you are free to say or think what you want. So are the police
and judges, however absurd it may be.
Human Right 20. Meet where you like. We all have the right to meet our friends
and to work together in peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a
group if we don't want to.
Indian Modification:
Of course you have a right to defend your rights, but do you have any
rights at all to defend?
Human Right 21. The right to democracy. We all have the right to take part in
the government of our country. Every grown-up should be allowed to choose their
own leaders.
Indian Modification:
Democracy is a govt. of the people, by the people, for the people.
Indian govt. is of the pimps, by the police, for the prostitutes.
Human Right 22. The right to social security. We all have the right to
affordable housing, medicine, education, and child care, enough money to live on
and medical help if we are ill or old.
Indian Modification:
You have all these rights if you are not a man.
Human Right 23. Workers' rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to a
fair wage for their work, and to join a trade union.
Indian Modification:
You have got this right. The only condition is that 90% of what you earn
should go to your bitter half, lawyers, police and judges.
Human Right 24. The right to play. We all have the right to rest from work and
to relax.
Indian Modification:
But with all the court cases where is the time to work or relax?
Human Right 25. A bed and some food. We all have the right to a good life.
Mothers and children, people who are old, unemployed or disabled, and all people
have the right to be cared for.
Indian Modification:
You have right to a bed. But don’t think about bedmate.
Human Right 26. The right to education. Education is a right. Primary school
should be free. We should learn about the United Nations and how to get on with
others. Our parents can choose what we learn.
Indian Modification:
Better not to get education. First you get educated, then you get a good
job, then you marry and then…
Human Right 27. Culture and copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects
one's own artistic creations and writings; others cannot make copies without
permission. We all have the right to our own way of life and to enjoy the good
things that "art," science and learning bring.
Indian Modification:
In Indian culture, everything from needle to aeroplane, from copyright
act to the entire constitution are copied from other countries. Copying a copy
is no offence
Human Right 28. A free and fair world. There must be proper order so we can all
enjoy rights and freedoms in our own country and all over the world.
Indian Modification:
You can enjoy your rights, but where are the rights?
Human Right 29. Our responsibilities. We have a duty to other people, and we
should protect their rights and freedoms.
Indian Modification:
Other people mean your vicious wife.
Human Right 30. Nobody can take away these rights and freedoms from us.
Indian Modification:
How can anybody take away something from you that you don’t have?
And why should we feel ashamed? When the judges are not ashamed even when they
are caught taking cash, when parents are not ashamed of living on their
daughters’ income, when the police are not ashamed of helping the criminals,
why should you? Shame is not in our culture.
of UNO.
Oh ! there are minor modifications though , as given below.
Human Right 1. We are all free and equal. We are all born free. We all have our
own thoughts and ideas. We should all be treated in the same way.
Indian Modification:
You are free to think whatever you want. But the government and the
judiciary are also free to treat you the way they want. We are all equal, equal
to animals.
Human Right 2. Don't discriminate. These rights belong to everybody, whatever
our differences.
Indian Modification:
The govt. and courts are not discriminating. They are treating you in
the same way they treat hardcore criminals and terrorists-GUILTY, TILL YOU BRIBE
Human Right 3. The right to life. We all have the right to life, and to live in
freedom and safety.
Indian Modification:
Of course you have got the right to life. What if the life is a hell for
you?
Human Right 4. Slavery â€" past and present. Nobody has any right to make us a
slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.
Indian Modification:
Who says we are treated like slaves? Even slaves get better treatment.
Human Right 5. Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.
Indian Modification:
In India torture is defined as when someone dies in police
custody.Nothing prior to that is cruelty.
Human Right 6. We all have the same right to use the law. I am a person just
like you!
Indian Modification:
Of course you can use law. But LAW is an extinct species in India?
Human Right 7. We are all protected by the law. The law is the same for
everyone. It must treat us all fairly.
Indian Modification:
Law protects us all. While wives get protection in your houses, you get
the same in jail.
Human Right 8. Fair treatment by fair courts. We can all ask for the law to
help us when we are not treated fairly.
Indian Modification:
You are treated fairly. Ask the courts. Whether you are treated fairly
or not is to be decided by the courts. Whether courts are fair or not is also to
be decided by courts.Courts have already granted you so many reliefs by
forgiving your life.
Human Right 9. Unfair detainment. Nobody has the right to put us in prison
without a good reason and keep us there, or to send us away from our country.
Indian Modification:
Courts are not sending you in prison without good reason. Don’t you
think a matter of several lacs of rupees a reason good enough for sending you to
prison?
Human Right 10. The right to trial. If we are put on trial this should be in
public. The people who try us should not let anyone tell them what to do..
Indian Modification:Still want more trial?
Human Right 11. Innocent until proven guilty. Nobody should be blamed for doing
something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the
right to show it is not true.
Indian Modification:
Implemented in India in slightly different way. You are innocent till
you marry.
Human Right 12. The right to privacy. Nobody should try to harm our good name.
Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters or bother us or our
family without a good reason.
Indian Modification:
In this age of transparency and right to information implemented on the
bureaucracy , how can you cattle citizens expect right to privacy.
Human Right 13. Freedom to move. We all have the right to go where we want in
our own country and to travel as we wish.
Indian Modification:
Yes. That’s why courts want you to travel from one state to another
defending your cases
Human Right 14. The right to asylum. If we are frightened of being badly treated
in our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be
safe.
Indian Modification:
Indeed the govt want you all to leave the country and settle abroad by
hook or crook. That’s why they treat you badly. Another reason for flourishing
"kabbootarbazi " business.
Human Right 15. The right to a nationality. We all have the right to belong to a
country.
Indian Modification:
You have right to call yourself an Indian. So you deserve all the bad
treatment as an Indian.
Human Right 16. Marriage and family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and
have a family if they want to. Men and women have the same rights when they are
married, and when they are separated.
Indian Modification:
STRICT Advice: Either don’t marry or don’t get separated after
marriage.
Human Right 17. Your own things. Everyone has the right to own things or share
them. Nobody should take our things from us without a good reason.
Indian Modification:
Of course you have a right to own things. But in India its your duty to
share them also including your hard-earned money, property and even wife with
police and judges.
Human Right 18. Freedom of thought. We all have the right to believe in what we
want to believe, to have a religion, or to change it if we want.
Indian Modification:
You also have a right to change your sex from male to female. Should
all men do that? Perhaps feminists want this.
Human Right 19. Free to say what you want. We all have the right to make up our
own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas
with other people.
Indian Modification:
Of course you are free to say or think what you want. So are the police
and judges, however absurd it may be.
Human Right 20. Meet where you like. We all have the right to meet our friends
and to work together in peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a
group if we don't want to.
Indian Modification:
Of course you have a right to defend your rights, but do you have any
rights at all to defend?
Human Right 21. The right to democracy. We all have the right to take part in
the government of our country. Every grown-up should be allowed to choose their
own leaders.
Indian Modification:
Democracy is a govt. of the people, by the people, for the people.
Indian govt. is of the pimps, by the police, for the prostitutes.
Human Right 22. The right to social security. We all have the right to
affordable housing, medicine, education, and child care, enough money to live on
and medical help if we are ill or old.
Indian Modification:
You have all these rights if you are not a man.
Human Right 23. Workers' rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to a
fair wage for their work, and to join a trade union.
Indian Modification:
You have got this right. The only condition is that 90% of what you earn
should go to your bitter half, lawyers, police and judges.
Human Right 24. The right to play. We all have the right to rest from work and
to relax.
Indian Modification:
But with all the court cases where is the time to work or relax?
Human Right 25. A bed and some food. We all have the right to a good life.
Mothers and children, people who are old, unemployed or disabled, and all people
have the right to be cared for.
Indian Modification:
You have right to a bed. But don’t think about bedmate.
Human Right 26. The right to education. Education is a right. Primary school
should be free. We should learn about the United Nations and how to get on with
others. Our parents can choose what we learn.
Indian Modification:
Better not to get education. First you get educated, then you get a good
job, then you marry and then…
Human Right 27. Culture and copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects
one's own artistic creations and writings; others cannot make copies without
permission. We all have the right to our own way of life and to enjoy the good
things that "art," science and learning bring.
Indian Modification:
In Indian culture, everything from needle to aeroplane, from copyright
act to the entire constitution are copied from other countries. Copying a copy
is no offence
Human Right 28. A free and fair world. There must be proper order so we can all
enjoy rights and freedoms in our own country and all over the world.
Indian Modification:
You can enjoy your rights, but where are the rights?
Human Right 29. Our responsibilities. We have a duty to other people, and we
should protect their rights and freedoms.
Indian Modification:
Other people mean your vicious wife.
Human Right 30. Nobody can take away these rights and freedoms from us.
Indian Modification:
How can anybody take away something from you that you don’t have?
And why should we feel ashamed? When the judges are not ashamed even when they
are caught taking cash, when parents are not ashamed of living on their
daughters’ income, when the police are not ashamed of helping the criminals,
why should you? Shame is not in our culture.
MINI MAHABHARAT IN COURT
A mini-Mahabharat is brewing between two communities which are part and parcel of judicial system -- judges and lawyers.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/city/bangalore/Judicial-officers-back-CJ-Dinakaran/articleshow/5078948.cms
Excerpts from the news with comments as Comments:
Expressing solidarity with Chief Justice P D Dinakaran, the Karnataka State Judicial Officers Association has termed the recent reports against him an onslaught on the independence of judiciary.
Comments: Hmmm... Karnataka judicial association is taking the same stand as CJI and coterie... say anything which casts an aspersion on judiciary and out comes the mantra of "independence of judiciary". Maybe judges need to wake up and realize that when 15 lakhs of cash bundle is delivered to a HC judge's doorstep, or large amount of land assets in Noida are transferred at dirt cheap rate to a HC judge, when large amounts of lands are found to be as assets of another HC judge; then the issue is not about 'independence of judiciary', but saving citizenry from such 'independent judiciary', which it seems is accountable to no one but its own coterie.
They said media reports on 50 to 60 per cent of judges being corrupt are baseless. "The reports also claimed that delay in disposal of cases is only on account of laxity of the judiciary. Such statements are highly derogatory and members of the association deprecate the same. The judiciary's image is tarnished on account of this," they noted.
Comments: A correction here... judiciary does not have an image anymore. Please conduct a survey of citizens, the to find out what they think of judiciary.
"False allegations are being made against judges at all levels without any basis and the courts are often boycotted. The functioning of the judiciary was interfered with only on the basis of reports appearing in the press without verifying the truth..."
Comments: Now one thing is clear... either the lawyers are complete morons, or have taken this opportunity to take some heat off from their own irresponsible behaviour every now and then. Who of the two is wearing the spotless clothes is difficult to say, so it is easy to figure that both of the two groups have something to hide and are engaging in this 'blame the other group' game to hide their own blemishes.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/city/bangalore/Judicial-officers-back-CJ-Dinakaran/articleshow/5078948.cms
Excerpts from the news with comments as Comments:
Expressing solidarity with Chief Justice P D Dinakaran, the Karnataka State Judicial Officers Association has termed the recent reports against him an onslaught on the independence of judiciary.
Comments: Hmmm... Karnataka judicial association is taking the same stand as CJI and coterie... say anything which casts an aspersion on judiciary and out comes the mantra of "independence of judiciary". Maybe judges need to wake up and realize that when 15 lakhs of cash bundle is delivered to a HC judge's doorstep, or large amount of land assets in Noida are transferred at dirt cheap rate to a HC judge, when large amounts of lands are found to be as assets of another HC judge; then the issue is not about 'independence of judiciary', but saving citizenry from such 'independent judiciary', which it seems is accountable to no one but its own coterie.
They said media reports on 50 to 60 per cent of judges being corrupt are baseless. "The reports also claimed that delay in disposal of cases is only on account of laxity of the judiciary. Such statements are highly derogatory and members of the association deprecate the same. The judiciary's image is tarnished on account of this," they noted.
Comments: A correction here... judiciary does not have an image anymore. Please conduct a survey of citizens, the to find out what they think of judiciary.
"False allegations are being made against judges at all levels without any basis and the courts are often boycotted. The functioning of the judiciary was interfered with only on the basis of reports appearing in the press without verifying the truth..."
Comments: Now one thing is clear... either the lawyers are complete morons, or have taken this opportunity to take some heat off from their own irresponsible behaviour every now and then. Who of the two is wearing the spotless clothes is difficult to say, so it is easy to figure that both of the two groups have something to hide and are engaging in this 'blame the other group' game to hide their own blemishes.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH
Domestic Violence- Truth and Reality
October is "Domestic Violence Awareness Month". India is observing “Domestic Violence Awareness Month" for the first time this year to make it an International event for all men’s rights and fathers’ rights groups across the world.Four organizations in Hyderabad viz. Save Indian Family Foundation, All India Forgotten Women, Rishtey and Children’s Rights Initiative for Shared Parenting, are launching this campaign on 2 October because it is the International Day of Non-Violence, an occasion meant for disseminating the message of non-violence through education and public awareness.
Beginning today, our month-long campaign will focus on educating the Indian public about how the problem of domestic violence has, for decades, been misrepresented, how domestic violence has been commercialized, and how Indian laws claiming to prevent domestic violence are actually promoting domestic violence and human rights abuses against men, women and children. We will also urge lawmakers and the Government to make appropriate reforms in laws and policies and make gender neutral provisions to end domestic violence against men, women and children.
The truth about domestic violenceUnbiased research on domestic violence the world over shows that:
1) Domestic Violence is not a gender issue.
2) Men and children are victims too.
3) Women are just as likely as men to commit domestic violence.
4) Women initiate domestic violence just as frequently as men do.
5) Men and children are less likely to report the incident when they are abused by their wives/girlfriends and mothers respectively.
6) Women’s organizations spread myths about domestic violence (e.g. Men are always the aggressors and women are always the victims).
7) Media coverage is often biased (e.g. A young married woman committing suicide is automatically reported as dowry death, and a young married man committing suicide is attributed to financial/family problems or mysterious reasons).
8) Politicians and bureaucrats find no incentive in addressing domestic violence by women against men, children and fellow women.
Indian laws against domestic violence
Indian laws against domestic violence are irrational and discriminatory, and blatantly violate provisions of the Indian Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.• The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaims that “everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.”But Indian laws against domestic violence presume that the accused is guilty until proven innocent and violate universal principles of fair trial.
• Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that "no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law".But every year, over 1 lakh innocent persons (one innocent person every 5 minutes) are arrested under IPC Section 498A, including 4,000 innocent senior citizens (one innocent elderly person every 2.5 hours) and 350 children (one child per day) without evidence or investigation.
• The Universal Declaration of Human rights states that “all are equal before the law, and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law". Article 14 of the Indian Constitution declares that “The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”But Indian laws against domestic violence blatantly deny protection to men against any form of domestic abuse, and every year, over 56,000 married men commit suicide due to verbal, emotional, economic and physical abuse and legal harassment.
• Indian laws against domestic violence are touted as tools for women's protection and empowerment.But in the last four years alone, over 1,23,497 women have been arrested under IPC Section 498A alone, without evidence or investigation, not for committing any crime under law, but only because they were related to a man.
The Domestic Violence IndustryIn India, domestic violence against wives is addressed by close to 15 laws (civil and criminal) including the infamous IPC Section 498A and Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA). However, there are no laws to protect husbands, children and other family members of the husband from domestic violence by wives. The credit goes to the Domestic Violence Industry and its stakeholders (women’s organizations, law enforcement machinery, legal fraternity, politicians and bureaucrats) whose survival depends on inciting and fueling a gender war, spreading myths and false statistics about domestic violence, encouraging false allegations, breaking families, and siphoning funds in the name of women’s empowerment from National and International funding agencies.If the problem of domestic violence is solved, would not the booming Domestic Violence Industry, which is immune to all vagaries of the economy, suddenly go bankrupt? It is no wonder that as more and more draconian and inhuman laws are passed under the guise of protection of women, we keep hearing that domestic violence against women is increasing, instead of decreasing.
Consequently, Indian taxpayers have spent lakhs to implement draconian laws and policies in the country. And the verdict is clear – these laws and policies: Trample on Constitutional Protections and Human Rights. Hurt men, women and children. Divert limited funds away from the real victims.
Domestic Violence Awareness Month activitiesSave Indian Family Foundation, All India Forgotten Women, Rishtey and Children’s Rights Initiative for Shared Parenting are organizing a campaign in Hyderabad (1) to spread awareness on “The Truth About Domestic Violence and Indian Domestic Violence Laws”, and (2) to urge lawmakers and the Government to reform the present discriminatory laws, and make gender-neutral provisions for the benefit of men, women, children, families and the society.
Our month-long campaign in Hyderabad includes the following activities:
October 2 - Press Conference to mark the beginning of Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
October 11 - Launch of All India Men’s Welfare Association (AIMWA) for protection of men and boys against gender discrimination, domestic violence, sexual harassment and other forms of abuse.
October 18 - Cultural program to spread awareness regarding the truth about domestic violence, and launch of Andhra Pradesh Mothers-in-law Protection Association (APMPA) for protection of mothers-in-law against discrimination, domestic violence, legal harassment and other forms of abuse.
October 25 – National Rally in Bangalore marking the third anniversary of the inhuman, ill-conceived Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA) as BLACK DAY.We will also be doing a massive flier campaign across the city throughout the month.Similar activities will be conducted in other cities across the country like Bangalore, Lucknow, Chattisgarh, Nagpur and Delhi.We request members of the print and electronic media to attend our events in large numbers and take part in the Domestic Violence Awareness campaign by providing extensive coverage for our events.
TOP 10 REASON FOR BEING A SLUGGISH JUDICIARY
In fact , it is a deliberate approach of the courts in India to delay the proceedings in all matter. The reasons can be well understood :
1. Delay the process to such an extent that people stop expecting justice from courts & settle issues amicably.
2. Issued settled amicably are best ways of settlement , no one will feel aggrieved.
3. HE HE HE Less work for the judges (for same remunerations)
4. Who is there to question us(judges)? Politicians (law makers) need judiciary's and judiciary needs politicians' support.(Andar ki baat !!)
5. We do not want to trouble our heads for others' disputes.
6. Oops I do not know how to decide the matter. I need to re-open the book.
7. Yawn !!! I have forgotten what happened before the vacations .( I am dreaming ---SWITZERLAND in cozy arms of my wife)
8. Let them wait !!
9. Ok Senior vakil sahib ! As you say , lets keep it for next year.
10. Dont eat my head. If you are aggrieved , go and file appeal .(as it is the matter is off my head,you go n screw my senior judge now).
1. Delay the process to such an extent that people stop expecting justice from courts & settle issues amicably.
2. Issued settled amicably are best ways of settlement , no one will feel aggrieved.
3. HE HE HE Less work for the judges (for same remunerations)
4. Who is there to question us(judges)? Politicians (law makers) need judiciary's and judiciary needs politicians' support.(Andar ki baat !!)
5. We do not want to trouble our heads for others' disputes.
6. Oops I do not know how to decide the matter. I need to re-open the book.
7. Yawn !!! I have forgotten what happened before the vacations .( I am dreaming ---SWITZERLAND in cozy arms of my wife)
8. Let them wait !!
9. Ok Senior vakil sahib ! As you say , lets keep it for next year.
10. Dont eat my head. If you are aggrieved , go and file appeal .(as it is the matter is off my head,you go n screw my senior judge now).
WORLD'S MOST LETHARGIC JUDICIARY
Justice Dispensation is a mirage in India. Nowhere in the world so many casesare kept pending for years together and this by itself is gross Human RightsViolation.The advocates do not consider ADVOCACY to be a Profession but a Business.Delay and dysfunction breeds their business. Never the advocates protested for speedy Justice or streamlining of procedures though they go on indefinite strikes at the drop of the Hat.The lower rung of Judges though underpaid never raise their little finger against inadequate infrastructure and morbid and pathetic working condition and enjoys corruption and power.The politicians are the cleverest of the lot. They use the Judiciary as scapegoat for their misdeeds. They leverage the Judiciary and police against their opponents in power games. They would love to have a dysfunctionalJudiciary!!. The allocation for Judiciary is parltry 0.07 percent in the budget.Tribunalisation is the order of the day to get Justice. Industry, Businessmenand Govt Revenue and land acquisition department take this short circuit to gettheir relief fast.Media is insensitive to the needs of people and slipper throwing at Judges aloneare news! They are afraid of Contempt of Court and kep quiet about theatrocities committed by Judiciary.The ground reality is only those middle class people approach the courts only toterrorize their opponents by delay and use of 'pending matter"If someone files a n election petition challenging the election of P Chidambaram the courts will give decision after 5 years!!Poor people get justice at Kangaroo Courts, Rich get their Justice throTribunals.The worst affected is only the Matrimonial Litigants. We should seektibunalisation of Matrimonial Justice!! All Family courts should be convertedinto Family Tribunals and every state shall have a state Appellate Tribunal.
SHEER VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.
SHEER VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS.
Saturday, September 5, 2009
CORRUPTION IN TOP JUDICIARY
"Half Of The Last 16 Chief Justices Were Corrupt"
The decision to declare assets is a big victory. Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan tells SHOMA CHAUDHURY what else is rotting in our judiciary .In public interest Prashant Bhushan has championed the fight for judicial accountability .
It’s great judges have agreed to declare assets. But will it really help? Politicians do it too.
This decision is very welcome, even if it’s only happened under public pressure. It is proof of the power of public opinion. And even though declaring assets is a relatively minor aspect of judicial accountability, it will help. If a judge misdeclares his assets, there’s a chance someone might know he has particular properties he hasn’t declared, and may point it out. One could then examine if these can be explained within their legal income.The debate around judicial accountability has got really hot.
Are there watershed events that triggered this?
Not in my own perception, but I think for the public there were two watershed events – the Chief Justice Sabharwal case (where there was an allegation that Chief Justice YS Sabharwal’s orders to demolish commercial outlets in Delhi directly benefited his sons, who were partners with some mall developers) and the Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam. Both these cases got wide media attention. A 2006 Transparency International report said the judiciary in India is the second most corrupt institution after the police.You’ve been at the forefront of the judicial accountability campaign.
Why?
I have been witness to judicial corruption in the courts for a very long time. I know decisions are passed for extraneous considerations, but it’s difficult to get hard evidence of this. There have been highprofile impeachment attempts, for instance, on Justice Ramaswamy, Justice Punchi and Justice Anand. Yet, they all went on to become chief justices. In my view, out of the last 16 to 17 chief justices, half have been corrupt. I can’t prove this, though we had evidence against Punchi, Anand and Sabharwal on the basis of which we sought their impeachment.
What is the root cause of judicial corruption then, and what are your key demands?
Our key demand is an institutional mechanism for entertaining complaints and taking action against the judiciary. Nothing exists today. Everyone realises impeachment is impractical. To move an impeachment motion you need the signatures of 100 MPS, but you can’t get them because many MPs have pending individual or party cases in these judges’ courts. In the impeachment proceeding against Justice Bhalla, the BJP declined to sign because LK Advani had been acquitted by him in the Babri Masjid demolition case. Such political considerations prevail all the time. An in-house procedure was set up in 1999, post a chief justices’ conference in 1997, but that too is activated only selectively. For example, the complaint against Justice Bhalla was that he had purchased land worth Rs 4 crore at Rs 4 lakh — approximately — from land mafia in Noida. This was based on a report from the DM and SSP of Noida. This land mafia had several cases pending in courts subordinate to Justice Bhalla. Another complaint was that in the Reliance Power matter, though his son was the lawyer for Reliance Power, Justice Bhalla constituted a special bench while he was the presiding judge in Lucknow. He sat in the house of one the judges at 11pm at night to hear their case and pass an injunction in their favour. We asked Chief Justice Sabharwal to initiate proceedings against Bhalla, but he refused.Similarly, Justice Vijender Jain decided the case of a person whose granddaughter had been married out of his own house. He was a close friend but he still heard and decided the case in this person’s favour. The point is, in these cases though very specific complaints were made to the then Chief Justice of India (CJI), he didn’t do anything to activate the in-house procedure. All these judges have gone on to become chief justices. Bhalla is still chief justice of Rajasthan; Virendra Jain became chief justice of Punjab and Haryana.
What’s the answer?
The first problem is that there is no independent institution for entertaining complaints and taking action against judges. There has to be a National Judicial Complaints Commission — independent of the government and judiciary. It should have five members and an investigating machinery under them. The second problem lies in the Veeraswamy judgment, which ordered no criminal investigation can be done against a judge without prior written permission of the CJI. That’s what happened in Karnataka. There was a complaint against several judges visiting a motel and misbehaving with women. When the police officer came, the judges threatened him and said no FIR could be filed against them because they were judges. This happened in the Ghaziabad Provident Fund case as well. The investigation is stumped because the CJI hasn’t given permission. We have to get rid of this injunction.The third problem is the Contempt of Court Act. Today, even if you expose a judge with evidence, you run the risk of contempt. Judges are even seeking to insulate themselves from the RTI. We have to get rid of the Contempt of Court Act – not the whole Act. Disobeying the orders of the court is civil contempt – that should remain. Interfering with the administration of justice is criminal contempt – that too should remain. What needs to be deleted is the clause about scandalising or lowering the dignity of the court, for which Arundhati Roy was sent to jail. Finally, there is the problem of appointments. Earlier, judicial appointments were made by the government, which was bad enough. Now, by a sleight of hand, the Supreme Court has taken the power of appointments to itself. Earlier there were political considerations; now there are nepotistic ones.
Again, what’s the answer to that?
We need an independent Judicial Appointments Commission, which is independent and works full time, and follows some systems and procedures. Eligibility lists should be prepared and comparative merits debated and evaluated. You can’t just pick judges arbitrarily, and let people know about it only after the deed is done.There is still no independent body to process complaints and action against judges
What are the best practices and conventions elsewhere?
We should at least have Public Confirmation hearings like in the US. In the Senate Judicial Committee, you have hearings where any public citizen can give evidence about the background of a judge that has bearing on their appointment. This is being fiercely resisted here.Do any counter arguments hold?None that I can see. The judges say all this will compromise their independence. Unfortunately, they are equating the independence of the judiciary with independence from accountability. Independence of the judiciary was meant to be independence from the political establishment, not from all accountability.Are there other ways in which judicial corruption manifests itself? There are so many. There is Justice Kapadia who decided on the Niyamgiri mining lease case in Orissa. He said Vedanta can’t be given the lease because it’s been blacklisted by the Norwegian government; but its subsidiary company Sterlite can get the lease because it is a publicly listed company. Justice Kapadia said it’s publicly listed because he had shares in it and yet he passed an order in favour of Sterlite! There is a law against judges hearing cases where there is a conflict of interest, but they just bypass it and you can’t complain because that would be contempt.
The decision to declare assets is a big victory. Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan tells SHOMA CHAUDHURY what else is rotting in our judiciary .In public interest Prashant Bhushan has championed the fight for judicial accountability .
It’s great judges have agreed to declare assets. But will it really help? Politicians do it too.
This decision is very welcome, even if it’s only happened under public pressure. It is proof of the power of public opinion. And even though declaring assets is a relatively minor aspect of judicial accountability, it will help. If a judge misdeclares his assets, there’s a chance someone might know he has particular properties he hasn’t declared, and may point it out. One could then examine if these can be explained within their legal income.The debate around judicial accountability has got really hot.
Are there watershed events that triggered this?
Not in my own perception, but I think for the public there were two watershed events – the Chief Justice Sabharwal case (where there was an allegation that Chief Justice YS Sabharwal’s orders to demolish commercial outlets in Delhi directly benefited his sons, who were partners with some mall developers) and the Ghaziabad Provident Fund scam. Both these cases got wide media attention. A 2006 Transparency International report said the judiciary in India is the second most corrupt institution after the police.You’ve been at the forefront of the judicial accountability campaign.
Why?
I have been witness to judicial corruption in the courts for a very long time. I know decisions are passed for extraneous considerations, but it’s difficult to get hard evidence of this. There have been highprofile impeachment attempts, for instance, on Justice Ramaswamy, Justice Punchi and Justice Anand. Yet, they all went on to become chief justices. In my view, out of the last 16 to 17 chief justices, half have been corrupt. I can’t prove this, though we had evidence against Punchi, Anand and Sabharwal on the basis of which we sought their impeachment.
What is the root cause of judicial corruption then, and what are your key demands?
Our key demand is an institutional mechanism for entertaining complaints and taking action against the judiciary. Nothing exists today. Everyone realises impeachment is impractical. To move an impeachment motion you need the signatures of 100 MPS, but you can’t get them because many MPs have pending individual or party cases in these judges’ courts. In the impeachment proceeding against Justice Bhalla, the BJP declined to sign because LK Advani had been acquitted by him in the Babri Masjid demolition case. Such political considerations prevail all the time. An in-house procedure was set up in 1999, post a chief justices’ conference in 1997, but that too is activated only selectively. For example, the complaint against Justice Bhalla was that he had purchased land worth Rs 4 crore at Rs 4 lakh — approximately — from land mafia in Noida. This was based on a report from the DM and SSP of Noida. This land mafia had several cases pending in courts subordinate to Justice Bhalla. Another complaint was that in the Reliance Power matter, though his son was the lawyer for Reliance Power, Justice Bhalla constituted a special bench while he was the presiding judge in Lucknow. He sat in the house of one the judges at 11pm at night to hear their case and pass an injunction in their favour. We asked Chief Justice Sabharwal to initiate proceedings against Bhalla, but he refused.Similarly, Justice Vijender Jain decided the case of a person whose granddaughter had been married out of his own house. He was a close friend but he still heard and decided the case in this person’s favour. The point is, in these cases though very specific complaints were made to the then Chief Justice of India (CJI), he didn’t do anything to activate the in-house procedure. All these judges have gone on to become chief justices. Bhalla is still chief justice of Rajasthan; Virendra Jain became chief justice of Punjab and Haryana.
What’s the answer?
The first problem is that there is no independent institution for entertaining complaints and taking action against judges. There has to be a National Judicial Complaints Commission — independent of the government and judiciary. It should have five members and an investigating machinery under them. The second problem lies in the Veeraswamy judgment, which ordered no criminal investigation can be done against a judge without prior written permission of the CJI. That’s what happened in Karnataka. There was a complaint against several judges visiting a motel and misbehaving with women. When the police officer came, the judges threatened him and said no FIR could be filed against them because they were judges. This happened in the Ghaziabad Provident Fund case as well. The investigation is stumped because the CJI hasn’t given permission. We have to get rid of this injunction.The third problem is the Contempt of Court Act. Today, even if you expose a judge with evidence, you run the risk of contempt. Judges are even seeking to insulate themselves from the RTI. We have to get rid of the Contempt of Court Act – not the whole Act. Disobeying the orders of the court is civil contempt – that should remain. Interfering with the administration of justice is criminal contempt – that too should remain. What needs to be deleted is the clause about scandalising or lowering the dignity of the court, for which Arundhati Roy was sent to jail. Finally, there is the problem of appointments. Earlier, judicial appointments were made by the government, which was bad enough. Now, by a sleight of hand, the Supreme Court has taken the power of appointments to itself. Earlier there were political considerations; now there are nepotistic ones.
Again, what’s the answer to that?
We need an independent Judicial Appointments Commission, which is independent and works full time, and follows some systems and procedures. Eligibility lists should be prepared and comparative merits debated and evaluated. You can’t just pick judges arbitrarily, and let people know about it only after the deed is done.There is still no independent body to process complaints and action against judges
What are the best practices and conventions elsewhere?
We should at least have Public Confirmation hearings like in the US. In the Senate Judicial Committee, you have hearings where any public citizen can give evidence about the background of a judge that has bearing on their appointment. This is being fiercely resisted here.Do any counter arguments hold?None that I can see. The judges say all this will compromise their independence. Unfortunately, they are equating the independence of the judiciary with independence from accountability. Independence of the judiciary was meant to be independence from the political establishment, not from all accountability.Are there other ways in which judicial corruption manifests itself? There are so many. There is Justice Kapadia who decided on the Niyamgiri mining lease case in Orissa. He said Vedanta can’t be given the lease because it’s been blacklisted by the Norwegian government; but its subsidiary company Sterlite can get the lease because it is a publicly listed company. Justice Kapadia said it’s publicly listed because he had shares in it and yet he passed an order in favour of Sterlite! There is a law against judges hearing cases where there is a conflict of interest, but they just bypass it and you can’t complain because that would be contempt.
MAN TO SELL KIDNEY TO PAY MAINTENANCE TO WIFE
THE BELOW NEWS PUBLISHED IN TIMES OF INDIA ON 27 AUGUST 2009 IS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT TO SHOW THE PATHETIC CONDITION OF INDIAN HUSBANDS UNDER THE EXISTING DRACONIAN DOWRY LAWS. A SHEER VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS , WHERE A MAN IS ADJUDICATED GUILTY MUCH BEFORE HIS TRIAL EVEN BEGINS AND EVEN AFTER THE "BIASED TRIALS" ARE OVER THE MISERY NEVER ENDS...........
Chandigarh: Unable to pay maintenance to his wife, a man has approached a court in Ropar, Punjab to allow him to sell his one of his two kidneys so that he could pay up. The Ropar resident, who found the sum stipulated by the court way beyond his means, filed an application under section 125 of CrPC (order for maintenance of wives, children) in the court of the judicial magistrate on August 22, seeking permission to sell his kidney to pay Rs 8,000 as interim maintenance to his wife. Narrating his ordeal in the application, he said the court had ordered him to pay his wife a monthly interim allowance of Rs 3,500 under CrPC and another interim maintenance of Rs 4,500 per month under the Domestic Violence Act. Denying any permanent means of livelihood, he said he found it difficult to sustain himself as his small monthly earnings made up for only Rs 3,600 per month. Despite his meagre income, the man tried to pay maintenance to his wife regularly. But, under the circumstances, he is left with no option but to sell his body organs. TNN
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)