Sunday, November 27, 2005

Karnataka High Court Quash 498A Case – Is this was a Dowry or Sowry Harassment Case??

Karnataka High Court Quash 498A Case – Is this was a Dowry or Sowry Harassment Case??



"Laws too gentle are seldom obeyed; too severe, seldom executed."
- Benjamin Franklin


THE HON’BLE JUSTICE A.C. KABBIN in

CRIMINAL PETITION NO 4121/2003 where the 498A case had been Quashed with the remark:-

“Nowadays more and more girls acquire technical education particularly in technical field. Economic independence achieved by such has changed the place of wife in the family. She may still continue be docile partner in marriage despite her capacity to earn or she may assert her rights. Day by day latter type ego females are increasing and that many times starts friction between couple. Every such quarrel cannot be termed as dowry. There may arise quarrel between a husband and equally or more qualified wife and earning wife for many reason and unless such quarrels , where the wife alleges harassment and relatives is relatable to dowry cannot be termed as dowry harassment . “

Further he added:-

“These developments clearly show that the dispute is not regarding any demand for dowry but about the ownership of the properties and sharing of the expenses of the child”.

The actual fact is the husband purchased a Plot in the name of wife, when he urgently leave to US for Company Job.

After coming back from US, when the husband asked to include his name in the Purchased property, the entire dispute started.

The observation as under:-

“The contention of the petitioner no.1 is that the flat no B-002 , Mantri Paradise was purchased in joint names of both husband and wife , the bulk of the payments were made by him as could be demonstrated from the amounts transferred from his bank accounts. . With regard to the transfer of the plot in Fern Habitat, His contention is that he has contributed for the purchase. That is the matter for the decision of the family court before which two original suits with regards to these properties are pending. However, this shows that the dispute was regarding ownership of properties and not about dowry as such “

So now the question is if any Husband Purchase a House or Plot in the name of Wife and afterward if any dispute occurs and the husband asked his share, will it termed as Dowry Demand?? That is the question to be asked to the LAW maker .
When a Husband asked some Property or money from wife or from their family to be termed as dowry harassment but when a wife asked or demand any property from a Husband or Husband family, why the same should not be termed as Sowry Harassment and a New LAW 498B to be applicable ???



Crime is Crime and the punishment should be as per Crime instead of the same determined by Sex , caste or religion , we wonder how many of us will agree with this and support a LAW which will be crime based instead of Gender Based.


With regards to this the observations Previously made by Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Saritha Vs R.Ramachandra reported in (I) (2003) DMC 37 ( DB ) may be referred to
“The court would like to go on record that for nothing teh educated women are approaching the courts for divorce and resorting to proceedings against in-laws under section 498a , IPC implicating not only the husbands but also their family members whether in India or Abroad. This is nothing but misuse of the beneficial provision intended to save the women from unscrupulous husbands . It has taken a reverse trend now. In some cases this kind of actions is coming as a formidable hurdle in the reconciliation efforts made by either well meaning people or the courts. and the sanctity attached to the marriage in Hindu Religion and the statutory mandate that the courts try to save the marriage through conciliatory efforts till last , are being buried neck-deep . It is for the law commission and the parliament either to continue that provision ( section 498a IPC ) in the same form or to make that offense non cognizable and bailable so that ill-educated women of this country do not misuse the provision to harass innocent people for the sin of contracting marriage with egoistic women “

This is Feminism or Legal Terrorism??
http://www.indiatalking.com/blog/swarup/1338/

In the case of Pepsi Food Limited and another Vs Special Judicial Magistrate and others reported in AIR 1998 S.C 128
“Summoning and Accused in a criminal case is serious matter .Criminal Law cannot be set into Motion as matter of course. It is not that complainant has to bring only two witnesses to support his allegations in the complaint to have criminal law set into motion. The order of the magistrate summoning the accused must reflect that he has applied his mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable there to .He has to examine the nature of the of allegations made in the complaint and the evidence both oral and documentary in support there on and would that be sufficient to for the complainant to succeed in bringing charge home to the accused. “


So when our LAW maker will Under Stand the Basis of any Justice system and Stop such Legal Terrorism in the Name of 498A, Anti- dowry LAW, Domestic Violence LAW.

If any LAW maker does not have the sufficient knowledge , then why they make such a stupid LAW ??http://www.indiatalking.com/blog/swarup/1326/

Indian Parents and Pregent Sister are in Jail !!!

Regards
Swarup Sarkar

Article published in :-
http://smartbahu.com/article439499.html
http://www.valuewebindia.com/article439499.html
http://presstrust.com/article439499.html
http://www.moviemaza.com/article439499.html


Disclimer :This is totally writer personnel Views only. You may have different opinion. The name and place changed to protect the Persons Identity.

2 Comments:

At 10:13 PM, Anonymous Friend said...

Investigative journalists, the legal system and Indian society needs to answer a very important question: "Why dowry accustaions are almost non-existent among the commumities and professions that are traditionally known to make big dowry demands, and why is it that most such (obviously false) accustions come from families with political and legal connections, and where they claim that they are educated, modern and liberated?"
Most families are against dowry. Nobody should have to give any dowry or be killed for it. In fact, neither the bride nor the groom should ask for or expect anything from their parents or in-laws. Then, there would be no dowry and no istridhan.
The families that give dowry must think that their daughters are either ugly, mentally or physically challenged/handicapped, have something to hide (e.g., girl’s affairs, previous marriages, pregnancies/terminations, illnesses/diseases, uncultured/ uncouth behavior, psychological and personality disorders, etc.) or the families are simply trying to show off.
All individuals who are responsible for dowry related deaths or suicides (including the cases where falsely accused individuals are forced to take their own lives) must be punished.
A number of people (who work at the grass roots level to do what the FemiNazi claim that they would like to do) feel that if the modern day communist socialites stopped arranging lavish kitty parties in expensive hotels where all the monies that could be better spent on needy women for an entire year gets spent in just one night, they could do a lot more.
If the NCW is really against injustice and gender equality, then in addition to having the families that ask for dowry (if the wife and her family take any money from the husband or his family during the marriage, that too is a dowry demand for which they need to be punished) or are guilty of dowry deaths jailed, they should also assist the men who have been falsely accused (by their ex-wives/in-laws) of dowry charges, and in the cases where it is proven that the 498A was misused by the woman/her family to abuse the ex-husband/his family, the FemiNazi and NCW should assist in having those women and their families jailed (e.g., the Nandas in the Ambavati case).

 
At 10:24 PM, Anonymous sunandan said...

In my mind, the entire marriage/divorce laws of India needs a serious
re-write/scrutiny. Marriage or divorce is a personal choice. There
can be no law that can force a person to stay with another if he/she
is not willing to. This is a 100 percent against democracy and a
person's right to exercise free will. Indian divorce law should
introduce a new - "irreconciliable differences" or "incompatibility"
ground for divorce. Also, when determining alimony/support etc. the
girl's earning-ability should be considered. Just because the guy
works in the United States, it does not make any logical sense for
law makers to prescribe "50 percent of his earnings" as support for
his ex-wife who resides in India where cost of living is far below.
When implementing laws that govern a nation, serious thoughts need to
be given to issues such as the above. Law is not a game and should
not be partial towards a bunch of feminists who advocate freedom of
the woman but do not feel any shame in receiving money in the way of
support etc. when she is very much capable of maintaining a
respectful life style. If India has to command respect from other
nations, it has to seriously reconsider revamping the legal system as
many a times bad laws or lack of meaningful or good ones becomes the
single and most important deciding factor for enterprises to do
business in a caountry. We should do all it takes so that people
respect a nation as a whole and producing Software people will only
take the nation to a certain extent in the international arena. All
will be lost if Indian law becomes a matter of joke at a state dinner
for eg. with digniteries from the international community. Just some
things to think about.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home