LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

raj kumar ji (LAW STUDENT )     16 September 2010

MISUSE OF DOWRY HARASSEMENT LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Supreme Court is so worried about the misuse of the dowry harassment law that it wants the Centre to assess it again.

The court has also said that lawyers should not encourage clients to file false complaints alleging dowry harassment and should ensure “that the social fibre of family life is not ruined”.

The court made the observations while quashing a criminal complaint filed by one Manisha Poddar against her husband Manish and his family. Manisha’s complaint, registered in 2007, said that her in-laws had demanded a luxury car from her parents.

“The reason for filing the complaint was to harass and humiliate the husband’s relatives,” a bench of justices Dalveer Bhandari and KS Radhakrishnan said.

In earlier judgments, the apex court had warned the police against encouraging complainants to exaggerate allegations against in-laws. This time, it offered the same advice to lawyers, saying “they [lawyers] must ensure that exaggerated versions of small incidents are not reflected in criminal complaints”.

The court also suggested to the government that the anti-dowry legislation be reviewed since most complaints under the law seem to be filed in the “heat of the moment over trivial issues without properly thinking them out’’. The court made the observations in a judgment given on an appeal by one Preeti Gupta from Surat and Gaurav Poddar from Goregaon, Mumbai.

Gaurav is Manisha’s brother-in-law. Manisha said in her complaint against her husband, Preeti, in-laws Pyarelal and Shushila and brother-in-law Gaurav that they demanded a luxury car from her parents when they visited her parents house to attend a festival in 2007.

But, it was found that Preeti and Gaurav had never visited Manisha’s parents’ home.

Besides, the court didn’t find evidence to show that Manisha had been assaulted. So, the judges said if the couple was unhappy with the marriage they could have filed for divorce.



Learning

 1 Replies

Bhaskar for SOCIAL JUSTICE (Legal & Social Activist)     30 November 2010

 

There should be equilibrium in law and justice and its should not be gender biased.

 

Today women is claiming ,maintenance whether they have any real problem with their husband or not but they are claiming it as a matter of right and it becomes business now to earn easy money. Marry the rich person , do quarrel with them and then claim maintenance and alimony.

 

It is a jungle raj and  way to become rich on others money.

 

If husband has duty to maintain her wife then wife has also duty to take care of him and give love and affection. So there should be no maintenance at all for wife's who are just trying to enrich them by using this ANDHA KANOON.

 

 

Certain suggestions to preserve families and to save them:

 

          No maintenance till guilty is proved and if husband is ready to reconcile and bear all the expenses of wife and children if she re-joins him.

 

          No maintenance  and alimony in the 2nd marriage if she has got it in the first divorce.

          No maintenance if she can maintain her or her parents can maintain her and if husband is ready to take her back.

 

          Compulsory mediation for avoiding long legal battle.

 

          Law should be such that both husband and wife try to reconcile .

 

          Law should not be favoring anyone to ensure that marriages are saved.

 

              Domestic violence complaint / fir should be filed within 24 hours of alleged incidence in place of today's situation in which wife and her parents try to black mail the husband and his family to agree to their terms and if they do not agree then they file case even after many years.

 

 

DV Act must be applicable equally to men and women as today women is more aggressive and ill-treat, abuse, beat husbands and in-laws but the DV Act not applicable to them. It must cover wife's and their families to ensure equality and justice.

 

 

The most important thing is to fix time limit for completion of hearing and disposal of case in any court say 6 months only. The cases must be tried on fast track basis. The infrastructure of the legislative system should be strenght4ened and cases must be disposed off within 6 months.

 

For filing cases some minimum requirement of proofs etc. must be there and it should not be like this that for any small small issue anybody can go and file the case.

Specially for family matters pre-litigation mediation must be compulsory and the behavior/flexibility of each party in resolving the issue must be recorded and should be base of their case in future (if any).

 

Dowry law, Hindu Marriage law, Domestic violence Act etc. must be made equal for both husband and wife. Lacs of husband are seceding because of these biased laws.

 

 

 

Petition praying for amendments in Section 498A of IPC.

By : Legal Fighter on 28 November 2010 Print this

 



 

Petition praying for amendments in Section 498A of IPC.

**********

The Committee on Petitions of the Rajya Sabha, under the Chairmanship of Shri Bhagat Singh Koshyari, Member, Rajya Sabha, is considering a petition praying for amendments in Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner in his petition has pointed out the extensive abuse and misuse of this provision of the Penal Code. According to the petitioner, the abused population undergoes tremendous harassment and torture. As these provisions of the penal code presently go, a complaint without much authenticity or any weight of evidence is enough to arrest the husband or the in-laws or anyone else named in the complaint, irrespective of whether any crime has taken place or not. The petitioner, accordingly, has prayed for suitable modification in section 498A of Penal Code so as to check its abuse and protect the interest of innocent persons.

2. The petition is available on the Rajya Sabha's website (www.rajyasabha.nic.in) under the link: Committees Standing Committees Committee on Petitions Petitions with the Committee.

3. The Committee has decided to undertake consultations with a wide cross-section of the society and invites written memoranda thereon. Those desirous of submitting memoranda to the Committee may send two copies (each in English and Hindi) thereof to Shri Rakesh Naithani, Joint Director, Rajya Sabha Secretariat, Parliament House Annexe, New Delhi – 110 001 (Tel: 011-23035433(O), 23794328 (Telefax) and E-mail: rsc2pet@sansad.nic.in) latest by 30th December, 2010.

4. Comments/suggestions, etc. submitted to the Committee would form part of its record and would be treated as confidential. Any violation in this regard may attract breach of privilege of the Committee.

5. Those who are willing to appear before the Committee besides submitting written comments/suggestions may indicate so. However, the Committee’s decision in this regard shall be final.

 
Source : Rajya Sabha Web-site, https://164.100.47.5/newcommittee/Petitions/Committee%20on%20Petitions/498%20IPC%20English.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register