• Please use an working Email account to verify your memebership in the forum

Save men from false dowry and domestic violence cases...

D

Deleted member 753

Guest
Screenshot_2021-10-11-07-42-00-1.pngfalse.jpg

* calls received from abroad too.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
A common contention made against laws relating to violence against women in India in the last 20 years of criminal law reform has been that women abuse such laws. Such “misuse” arguments were raiseyd vigorously in the police, civil society, politicians and even judges of the High Courts and the Supreme Court. Misuse was alleged, particularly against IPC Sec 498A and the offence of the dowry death of Sec 304B. Domestic violence and harassment by partners and family members are nuanced activities that routinely continue to devalue domestic violence incidents through the institutional structure of courts, police.
Sec 498A was implemented in the IPC in 1983 and, following the institutionalization of law and policy to criminalize domestic violence, the government has not properly assessed the changes of the past 20 years with regard to their deterrent targets. There is an immediate need for a research and development plan to improve the existing state of understanding about the impact of legislative penalties on domestic abuse. The definition of marriage, as well as the patriarchal position of a man and woman, has undergone a dramatic shift in the modern world, where both men and women are independent and earning. Females also misuse the legislation that has been designed to defend themselves from abuse and brutality and make false claims about their husbands in order to get rid of them or actually defame the family.
This section ‘s violence is increasingly growing as well-educated women know that this section is both cognizable and non-bailable and can thus be caused by a woman’s simple accusation, thereby putting the man behind bars. Section 498A was adopted in 1983, after seeing the widespread existence and severity of recorded cases of female cruelty. The implementation of Section 498A IPC is a punitive provision in accordance with allied provisions in the Code of Civil Procedure so intended to impart a deterrent feature. However, cases of false and exaggerated allegations and involvement of several of the husband’s and his family’s relatives have been spreading rampantly, leading to widespread recognition of these beneficiary laws as a means of exacting the wives revenge.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
IPC 498A

Section 498A of IPC came as a significant addition to the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which was introduced in 1983 to safeguard the rights and empowerment of women. Under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, extortion of any form of property by subjecting a woman to cruelty is punishable. The Government of India amended the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) by way of the Criminal Law (Second Amendment ) Act, 1983 on 26 December 1983, and inserted a new Section 498(A) under Chapter XX-A, Of Cruelty By Husband Or Relatives Of Husband.

The word ‘cruelty’ has been described in broad terms so as to include causing physical or mental harm to the body or health of the woman and indulging in acts of harassment with a view to coerce her or her relations to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable protection.

The section was enacted to deal with the threat of dowry deaths. It was implemented in the code by the Criminal Law Reform Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983). By the same Act, Section 113-A has been added to the Indian Evidence Act to raise presumption regarding abetment of suicide by a married woman. The main aim of the I.P.C section 498-A is to shield a woman who is being abused by her husband or husband’s relatives.

Harassment for dowry falls within the sweeping of the Section’s latter limb and creating a condition that pushes the woman to commit suicide is also one of the ingredients of ‘cruelties’. It states that if such a woman is subjected to cruelty by a husband or relative of a woman’s husband, he shall be punished with imprisonment for a period of up to three years and also liable to fine. The crime under Section 498A is cognizable, non-compoundable and non-bailable.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
For the commission of an offence under Section 498-A, following necessary ingredients require to be satisfied:

  1. The woman must be married;
  2. She must be subjected to cruelty or harassment; and
  3. Such cruelty or harassment must have been shown either by the husband of the woman or by the relative of her husband.
This section’s bare perusal points out that the word ‘cruelty’ covers the occurrence of the following Act(s):

  1. any willful behaviour which might lead a woman to suicide or cause serious damage or danger to life, limb, or life;
  2. a woman’s health (mental or physical);
  3. The harassment of a woman in the event of such harassment, with a view to obliging her or any other person related to her to fulfil an illegal requirement for any property or valuable security.
In case of, Kaliyaperumal v. State of Tamil Nadu, the Hon’ble Court held that in offences under each of Sections 304B and 498A of the IPC, cruelty may be a common element. Nevertheless, the two sections are not reciprocally inclusive, each articulate offence connected with guilty persons under section 304B of the dowry death offence shall be guilty of an offence under section 498A of the IPC. Section 304B does not contain its definition, but further applies in section 304B the concept of cruelty or abuse specified in section 498-A. Under section 498A of the IPC, cruelty alone amounts to a related crime, while under Section 304B the offence relates to gift death and that death should have occurred during the seven-year marriage period. However, no such sum is stated in section 498A.
 
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
Misuse of Section 498A in the modern era
A violation of this section is done by women by creating frivolously false allegations against their husbands with the goal of getting some money or just paining the family. This section’s abuse is increasing chop-chop and therefore the ladies usually apprehend their husbands.

Section 498A was designed and inserted into the legal framework by the lawmakers with the idea of protecting women from cruelty, harassment and other offences. But when cross-investigations are performed to test the validity of these laws, the number of acquittals relative to convictions was greater. Thus, one who brought 498A into action conceiving it as a shield against cruelty for women, i.e., the Supreme Court, is now considering it as legal terrorism. Because misuse of Section 498A diminishes its true credibility. That is one of several reasons for calling it an anti-male law. Although there are widespread complaints, and even large-scale misuse has been recognized by the judiciary, there is no reliable data based on the empirical study regarding the extent of the alleged misuse.

In case of, Savitri Devi v. Ramesh Chand & Ors, the Hon’ble Court specifically regulates the abuse connected with the manipulation of the laws to such an extent that it was totally influenced by the influence of marriage itself and thus found not to be intelligent for the welfare of the giant community. The court considered that authorities and lawmakers had to review the case and the legal provisions to prevent it from happening.

In the case of, Saritha v. R. Ramachandran, the Court noted the reverse trend and requested a non-cognizable and bailable offence from the Law Commission and Parliament. However, it was the court’s requirement to condemn wrongdoing and to shield the victim from what happens once the victim becomes the abuser. Here is what remedy the husband will have. On this ground, the lady gets to divorce her husband and remarry or in the form of compensation may gain cash.

In the case of Anju v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, In the case, the wife of the Petitioner challenged the order of the Lower Court, whereby the Court discharged the charges against the respondents under section 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

In appreciating the facts of the case, the Court noted that in the FIR, the wife of the Petitioner in one breath named all members of the family without any specific role being assigned to any of them. Thus, no details were provided as to when the recorded instances allegedly occurred, or any facts to substantiate or corroborate the allegations against relatives of the spouse. The Court also noted that the allegations against the respondents were fairly general and unspecific. The plaintiff did not mention a date, time, month, or year when she was subjected to beating them. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court of Bombay upheld the order of the Revisional Court and held that the Court had made no mistake in concluding that, apart from the general and omnibus allegations that roped in all relations, there is no recorded material to justify the framing of charges under Section 498A IPC.

In the case of, Chandra Bhan v. State, the Hon’ble Court introduced the steps to prevent the misuse of this Section:

  1. FIR should not be regularly reported as such;
  2. Police endeavour should be to carefully screen complaints and then register FIR;
  3. No case should be registered under section 498-A/406 IPC without the prior authorisation of DCP / Addl. DCP;
  4. Before FIR registration, all possible reconciliation efforts should be made and, if it is found that there is no possibility of settlement, necessary steps should be taken in the first instance to ensure that stridhan and dowry articles are returned to the complainant;
  5. The arrest of the key accused can only be made after a proper investigation and with the prior approval of the ACP / DCP has been performed;
  6. In the case of collateral accused such as in-laws, prior approval of DCP should be there on the file.
In the case of, Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others, the Supreme Court held that the purpose of the provision is to prevent a threat to the dowry. But as the petitioner rightly satisfied that many instances have come to light where the complaints are not bonafide and are filed with oblique motive. In these cases, the acquittal of the accused will not wash out the ignominy incurred during and before the court in any case. Adverse media attention also contributes to the situation.

Hence, the question is what remedial steps can be taken to discourage misuse of the well-intentioned clause. Just because the provision is constitutional and intra vires, it does not allow unscrupulous people to wreck personal vendetta or unleash harassment. Thus, it may become necessary for the legislature to find ways to deal appropriately with the makers of frivolous complaints or allegations. Until then, under the current system function, the Courts have to take care of the situation.

But new lawful terrorism can be unleashed by misuse of the provision. The object of the law is to use a shield and not the arms of an attacker. There is no question of the investigative agency and courts treating the allegations lightly. In matters relating to dowry torture, death and cruelty, they can not follow any straitjacket formula. It can not be lost sight that the ultimate aim of any legal system is to reach the truth, punish the guilty and protect the innocent. Some preconceived idea or perception has no scope. The complainant strongly claims that the enforcement agencies and the courts begin with the presumptions that the accused are guilty and that the plaintiff speaks the truth. This argument is too broad and generalized. Some statutory presumptions are drawn which are again reprehensible. It should be noted that the role of the investigating agencies and the courts is a watchdog and not a bloodhound.

Their intention will be to ensure that an innocent person is not made to suffer because of baseless, groundless, and malicious accusations. It is equally undisputed that there is no direct evidence available in many cases, and that the courts must act on circumstantial evidence. The law developed in relation to circumstantial evidence which must be held in mind when dealing with these cases.

Many women’s rights teams go against the concept of making the crime a non-cognizable and bailable one assuming this gives the defendant a chance to escape prosecution. What this might do, though, is that it will provide the individual with a chance and, in turn, promote the accomplishment of the ends of justice. Justice will protect the weaker and ensure that the wrong-doer gets a chance to say back his/her due. When ladies suspect their husbands below Section 498A IPC by making the crime and unrecognizable, if the person is innocent he does not get a quick opportunity to urge justice and delayed justice is denied justice.

That, the lawmakers will prescribe how to create this section objectively to someone who has decided that the right party is punished and therefore justice is granted to the wrong person. Ladies’ role continues to be dangerous in India. They still want rights in society to mitigate themselves, but many times they neglect to consider the rights of others as long as their unit in the area of rights is guaranteed. These days’ educated lady should believe the slogan of equality and relentless demand but the pattern is slowly getting reversed.

Because of the false accusations and the immoral exercise of section 498A, the innocent, i.e. the husband and his family, are exponential to suffer. Some of the men give up and commit suicide during this period of hardship and ignominy. Here the law must exercise the power with thorough investigation and cross-examination of the whole matter in a just manner.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
Misuse of Section 498A is not a rumour it is proved now, the woman laid down a false charge under the provisions of Section 498A IPC and created her husband under the rule. The boys have no laws to protect themselves from women’s abuse. Moreover, in every district court case, section 498A IPC was misused. The cases were still unresolved, and the square measure of husbands paying maintenance to their wife just because he’s husband doesn’t mean he’s to blame for all the expenditures and benefits. The ladies are scammers as opposed to men in society. This section is used as a weapon by the wives to collect some cash from their husband’s. It is the fact that Section 498A IPC is misuse by the women to husbands and in-laws. The tests are finished and published already. This segment was seen to be keen on people. Section 498A is right to protect women, but it’s actually harassment of husband and in-laws by a spouse. The effect on society of this example is terribly unhealthy. The Law Commission addressed the issue concerning abuse of this provision in its 243 reports on IPC Section 498A. The commission has recommended that the offence can only be made compoundable with the court’s permission, and precautions must be taken before granting. The commission has recommended, however, that the offence should remain undeclared. The abuse does not mean that we are removing the usefulness of the laws that impact the wider public interest.
 

Phoenix

Well-known member
Messages
966
Points
93

Reputation:

?? The crux of having such laws are safety measures first of all. They're there to protect women. Our society is structured in a way that domestic violence both physical and emotional abuses, marital rapes are normalised. And when a powerful family r man r accused, the first thing they say is.. Its all a lie.. But many have been convicted after proper investigation.
do some women misuse this? Yes they do. Same goes for all other laws in this country. Even killers, rapists and burglars r acquitted everyday using the loopholes in the laws. But we wont raise our voice against them coz its not affecting the false patriarchial pride that is imbided in us.
considering the violent deaths, abuses, scars, social injustices done to women in the name of dowry, these laws are still very much in need.
No man is getting killed for the simple reason of getting married, no man's family is abused continuously and looted by the other so that their children could have a marital life. Till this social inequality is balanced... This is needed.
 
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
?? The crux of having such laws are safety measures first of all. They're there to protect women. Our society is structured in a way that domestic violence both physical and emotional abuses, marital rapes are normalised. And when a powerful family r man r accused, the first thing they say is.. Its all a lie.. But many have been convicted after proper investigation.

nan thappu panavanla solala inga.. innocent mens pathi tha pesuren...

do some women misuse this? Yes they do.

thanks for agreeing.

Same goes for all other laws in this country.

here i am speaking only about IPC 498A and its allied sections.

Even killers, rapists and burglars r acquitted everyday using the loopholes in the laws. But we wont raise our voice against them coz its not affecting the false patriarchial pride that is imbided in us.
considering the violent deaths, abuses, scars, social injustices done to women in the name of dowry, these laws are still very much in need.


but not misused against innocents...

No man is getting killed for the simple reason of getting married, no man's family is abused continuously and looted by the other so that their children could have a marital life.


so many cases are registered like this...


Till this social inequality is balanced... This is needed.
 
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
I know very well while starting to post this issue here that "Some people had strongly recorded in mind that - Females bathikapaduravanga... Male Pathibukulakuravanga".But I posted this to raise voice to support innocent mens who are falsely accused by this law...


I strongly believe in VAIMAIYE VELLUM
 

Mazhai

Well-known member
Messages
322
Points
93

Reputation:

Athu yen oru man misuse panina, avanga per mattum thaan veliya varum, but oru ponnu thappa case file panina, women are filing fake cases against husbands nu
varuthu news la. Law ah misuse panraanga nu solraanga. Intha law iruka kodathu nu solraanga. Example Vijay malya loan issue la, men banks oda rules ah misuse panraanga nu varlaye, vijay. Malya nu thanipatta oru aal thaan misuse panjnaan nu solraanga. bank loans ah cancel pananum nu pechu varalaye.
 
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
Athu yen oru man misuse panina, avanga per mattum thaan veliya varum, but oru ponnu thappa case file panina, women are filing fake cases against husbands nu
varuthu news la.


Varuthu yar thappu paninalum.

Law ah misuse panraanga nu solraanga.

misuse nadanthukitu than iruku..

Intha law iruka kodathu nu solraanga.

law iruka koodathu ila.. necessary amendments needed tha solranga.

Example Vijay malya loan issue la, men banks oda rules ah misuse panraanga nu varlaye, vijay. Malya nu thanipatta oru aal thaan misuse panjnaan nu solraanga. bank loans ah cancel pananum nu pechu varalaye.

and again i am speaking only about IPC 498A. vijay malaya case is not covered under this section... so irrelevant.
 

Phoenix

Well-known member
Messages
966
Points
93

Reputation:

I understand the nature of your post. You want to raise ur voice against innocent men who were made victims by false claims. But the point is, many men dont even know what they are doing could be abuse! For example, if a man scolds his wife vehemently in front of his whole family.. We as a society wont even bat our eyes coz it has been normalised for so long that it is okay for a man to treat his woman as he likes. Not even scolding, a slap, a simple "shut up!" all these things are mental abuses. Treating a fellow human as a lesser human. And whats happens inside closed doors... Those horrors... We r not even capable of imagining. So... When a woman files a case, the first thing she battles is defamation of her character and her family's social standing. Yet still many do and when a woman raises voice, some men cant even believe that they are doing so since they consider that it is OKAY to abuse their wives. It is OKAY to treat her bad, it is OKAY to pass on stupid jokes about wives and lewd comments about wife's sister. It is OKAY to loot money from his wife's family. But it is NOT OKAY. So it is high time we take a stand.
 
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
I understand the nature of your post. You want to raise ur voice against innocent men who were made victims by false claims.

thanks for understanding.

But the point is, many men dont even know what they are doing could be abuse! For example, if a man scolds his wife vehemently in front of his whole family.. We as a society wont even bat our eyes coz it has been normalised for so long that it is okay for a man to treat his woman as he likes.

some mens also facing these things

Not even scolding, a slap, a simple "shut up!" all these things are mental abuses. Treating a fellow human as a lesser human. And whats happens inside closed doors... Those horrors... We r not even capable of imagining. So... When a woman files a case, the first thing she battles is defamation of her character and her family's social standing.


tharalama case file panatum... but not against innocents.

Yet still many do and when a woman raises voice, some men cant even believe that they are doing so since they consider that it is OKAY to abuse their wives. It is OKAY to treat her bad, it is OKAY to pass on stupid jokes about wives and lewd comments about wife's sister. It is OKAY to loot money from his wife's family. But it is NOT OKAY. So it is high time we take a stand.

ivlo soldringa... innocent mens bathikapadurathu kandikapadavendiyathu nu oru line varalaye...
 
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
Sattam than kadamaiyai senjaale pothumnu soldren.

athey tha nanum soldren

Naanum than avlo soldren. Innocent men... Always innocent a ve irukarathu illanu accept panna ungaluku manasu vanthucha????

female also always innocent ah irukaruthu ilanu nenga accept pandringla?
 

Phoenix

Well-known member
Messages
966
Points
93

Reputation:

Athan appove sollitene.. Yes they misuse... Exceptions r there in every case!!! Ithu marukka mudiyatha unmai... Greater good and bigger picture.. Athan thevai.. Avlo than! I rest my case ur lord!
 
D

Deleted member 753

Guest
Athan appove sollitene.. Yes they misuse... Exceptions r there in every case!!! Ithu marukka mudiyatha unmai... Greater good and bigger picture.. Athan thevai.. Avlo than! I rest my case ur lord!
Nice!!!


Judgement : Both men and women laws misuse panama ... antha laws nala safety & protection petru santhosama vazhanum... ??
 

Mazhai

Well-known member
Messages
322
Points
93

Reputation:

>law iruka koodathu ila.. necessary amendments needed tha solranga.
Ok right, unga post oda title ah apo maathunga, need amendments for 498A nu.

Vijay malya oda case example ku sonen. Nothing is irrelevant, you fail to see the connection.
 
Top