Quashing of 498 a

Nishhant (Business) 09 July 2009

if anyone have more suggestions related to my question and matter please post ,

Thanks

Vishwa (translator) 10 July 2009

Dear Nishant

I can understand your feeling upset that people are talking about all other things but not addressing your specific problem. However, this is a public forum where people can express their views as they please. If you want real answers, then you must deal with a lawyer of your choice paying him his due (or undue) fees.

As a layman, I can tell you that once the matter has gone to poiice and courts, your marriage is really finished. Once you accept this fact perhaps you can move on with your life.

As for your 498.a case, it is likely to drag on for years, draining your resources. If I were you, I would bring pressure on your wife to withdraw her case. Perhaps she has cultivated other relationships while you were abroad. She must surely have a weak point somewhere. Even a lawyer cannot dispute that attack is the best form of defence.

Vishwa

Carlisle Collins (Samaritan) 13 July 2009

This 498a issue was presented before the Forum over two months ago. I’m certain Mr. Nishant’s predicament existed long before then. A myriad of plausible actions were also suggested from competent members of the Forum and the general intricacies vociferously discussed. It seems to me that our ‘e-client’ has so far been statically reclined in the deliberation stage but offering new/additional information incrementally that is only serving to change the viability of any proposed course of action. At this point in time, I’m inclined to recall the wisdom of an ancient sage who observed, “There’s a time to ponder and pick your nose for gold; and, there’s a time for decisive action”. I think it’s high time Mr. Nishant engaged the services of a competent attorney who’d put all that nose picking time to constructive use.

Nishhant (Business) 13 July 2009

yea , we have already engaged the qualified attorneies to look after the case ............ as the legal matter would only be solved through legal channels.

I am really thankfull to all of you to contribute your valuable guidences ......... need to say to Vishwa that before making comments one should read the complete matter ........ should not enter in even public disscusions if he is not aware with the topic ....... rest i am leaving on him that if his case would be the matter then how he will deal with his wife .

Thanks to all

Nishhant

Khaleel Ahmed Mohammed (Advocate ) 13 July 2009

I agree with Mr.Kiran.

san (social service) 13 August 2009

beware of lawyers for whom compromise is the first word. A good lawyer will leave that decision upto you. These are the ones, who sell their clients. Sure enough, in the long term, one can compromise, but, no unjust terms. Also quash is not that rare nowadays, please have a look at recent SC judgements, regarding quash.

Deekshitulu.V.S.R (B.Sc, B.L) 14 August 2009

Mr San

I am in this field for the past 36 years. I have conducted many cases under Sec. 498-A. I am also presently the Addl.P.P. for fast track court at our place. I deal with 302, 304-B, etc. In almost all the cases when the matter is given schedule, the parties are compromising it and the prosecution witnesses are turning hostile.

What I am trying to point out is when a client comes to you with a cose, he seeks an advise. So as far as Kiran sab is concerned, he advises for a compromise, and this is the practice here also. If not at one point of timeor the other the same advise will be given by the lawyer, looking at the tenor of judgments of H.Cs and Apex Court.

So insted of waiting upto the last minute and spending the money of the client, it is advised that a compromise is a welcome step, so that the client will have some peace

And simply because compromise is suggested, we cannot coin a lawyer as a cheat or an useless fellow or that he joined with the, other side. Even at the compromise the client will be there and after his satisfaction only the compromise will be recorded. It is not done by the lawyer, without the knowledge of the client.

Hence keeping every step of the court procedure in mind, it is generally suggested that a compromise be made in a matter. OK the decision is with the client, he has to exercise his mind and then the lawyer takes the back seat.

As you know the decisions touching secs 304-B, 498-A, and such other laws which give protection to women, are so serious, that the life of a groom will be totally spoiled. I would say that these laws are mostly misused, and abused.

Why not similar laws for men who are suffering excruciating mental agony and torture in the hands of women. Just think of the issue. No answer

Bye

Deekshitulu.V.S.R (B.Sc, B.L) 14 August 2009

I may continue

Mr Kiran is right, so also Collins, and every body looking at this issue. Every decision or act of lawyer depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, and more so the practical problems that have to be faced in a court of law, and the circumstances around the issue. AndI respect every thought of a lawyer. I will always try to err on the right side of a problem, and the safetty of my client is most important.

Bye

1 Like

Carlisle Collins (Samaritan) 14 August 2009

Deeksh*tulu Saheb: With due respect, Sir, don’t you now see why we have a Justice System that operates in similar manner as putting the cart before the horse? There’s no rationale in either setting. Certainly, we can handle the complex but how does one deal with issues that are confusing, DELIBERATELY confusing, and deliberately confusing for all?

In this maze of disorder exists an inviting doorway that offers a way out; call it ‘bribery’, extortion, reconciliation, or compromise. If the defendant has some measure of culpability or is being overcome be exigent pressure, a compromise would morally, ethically (and legally) be the way to go. But, if not, ‘Compromise’ would remain a euphemism for succumbing to successful opportunism.

Please bear with me as I explain my stance (with a preface that might enhance the general knowledge of some readers):

I know of one individual who works as a “Professional Witness” for the local Police. He also works part-time lending his “witness skills” in civil cases (land disputes, etc.). You can say he has an honest job doing dishonest work! In the West, an unpublicized haven for opportunism, there are known to be some shrewd individuals that have been making quite a lucrative living out of Tort claims against insurance companies, food franchises, chain stores, etc. It is common knowledge that the larger conglomerates set aside a small part of their operational budget to accommodate the likelihood of frivolous law suits. Corporate policy usually favors an out-of-court compromise in preference to a full-fledged court battle – unless damages claimed are exceptionally steep, there exists a likelihood of escalation to a class action scenario, adverse publicity that needs to be decisively challenged in a public forum, etc. Aside from such contingencies that hold propensity for a ‘live or die’-type predicament, a ‘Compromise’ (referred to as an ‘out-of-court settlement’) is quite common.

In criminal proceedings also, out-of-court settlements over there are the norm. But the ‘compromise’ being worked at is NEVER between the defendant and victim in private but the defendant and the State (which is represented by the Prosecutor). This is called “Plea Bargaining”. At this point in the proceedings, no trial has yet commenced. But the defendant is offered a ‘less severe’ punishment if he accepts a verdict of “Guilt” now rather than the higher level of punishment if he decides to go to trial and be found “Guilty” beyond a reasonable doubt (or, conversely, be found “Not Guilty” and acquitted).

Prior to reaching the “Plea Bargaining”/Compromise stage of the criminal process, all essential ‘homework’ and investigation will have been done. A determination will have already been made on the sufficiency (and tenability) of evidence, witnesses, etc. and the likelihood of a successful conviction in the event the defendant was resolute to claim his right to trail. This transaction is an out-of-court affair but above board, transparent, recorded, and documented. It formalizes an agreement between the defendant and the State solemnized by the judge as his pronouncement of disposition.

But here, in Indian courts, the system is generally such that it allows for the collapse of a potentially good case by its ridiculously tolerant outlook on witnesses turning “hostile”. Calling a “Spade”, a spade, an appropriate and factual term of reference for these “Hostile Witnesses” would be Liar, Opportunist, Mercenary, Extortionist, Deceitful, Prostitute, Rascal, …. Because, chances are, everyone involved has formed a reasonably accurate opinion for such witnesses recanting their earlier testimony. (Unless, of course, the cause is an honest lapse of memory).

Deeksh*tulu Saheb: during your impressive 36 years’ of practise and the multitude of cases you came across where witnesses turned “hostile” (or were found to be deliberately falsifying testimony), just how many were actually prosecuted for perjury? Zero? In the 36 years of your practise, how many government officials (viz., Police, Prosecutors, allied witnesses in aggravation, e.g., Forensic Personnel, Laboratory staff, etc.) were found to be lying on the stand? And of these, how many were prosecuted for perjury? Zero again? But even when there is brouhaha about someone (usually a public figure) being taken to task for perjury, how many were ever convicted for it?

Doesn’t this tell you something? It tells me in no uncertain terms that even though IPC 193 provides punishment for perjury for up to 7 years, some courts seem to relate to perjury on their very own personal, liberal standards as though saying, “It’s OK to lie in my court because I also am a lier”. So what of our system of ‘checks and balances’ that purports to represent a search for truth? Does this gloomy picture mean that our judiciary, lawyers, staff, police, “the System” is corrupt? (So just leave it at that and do the best we can to bribe our way out thru’ a “compromise”?).

NOT NECESSARILY!

I believe long before the case escalates to the Trial stage and the examining of prospective witnesses that may go “hostile”, there should be in place an effective mechanism for screening cases to determine appropriateness for prosecution. Ideally this should commence at the Police Station level where a preliminary post F.I.R. investigation would influence the decision whether to pursue with criminal charges or not. But since it is widely acknowledged that our bandits in uniform resort to their very own private agenda and in-house standards to decide either on supporting, or exaggerating, or creating a criminal case, it would defeat the purpose to involve the police in decisions that require objectivity, impartiality, and truthfulness as they generally happen to be the principals directly as well as vicariously responsible for contaminating the court process.

This function which requires responsible execution can only be entrusted to persons with integrity. A good place (and in good faith!) to start would be the Public Prosecutor. As I had previously advised a young aspiring Club member to the PP position, “The Public Prosecutor’s job is a noble undertaking (but unfortunately tainted by the corrupt practices of some profiteers in that profession) that compromise the dignity of the mission. Ethical duty of a prosecutor is an extraordinary obligation that exceeds that imposed upon defense counsel. A Prosecutor is held to a higher standard than that imposed on other lawyers because of the unique function he or she performs in representing the interests, and in exercising the sovereign power, of the state. The prosecuting officer occupies a semi-judicial position; that he is charged with a large discretion, and that, while it is his duty to bring to justice those whom he believed to be guilty, IT IS EQUALLY HIS DUTY TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT AND TO REFRAIN FROM PROSECUTING THOSE AGAINST WHOM NO SUFFICIENT OR REASONABLE PROOFS CAN BE FOUND. In the course of his duties he sometimes has to stand between an incensed public sentiment, voiced by a clamorous press, and suspected persons against whom no proofs of crime can be produced. Prosecutors must always keep in mind that their duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict.”

You will realize a significant percentage of trial cases where witnesses turned hostile were cases that really lacked sufficiency in admissible evidence or were, in truth, only pursued as a ‘gamble’ or due to some extraneous pressure. I believe that if we could influence an effective pre-prosecution screening system in place, it would mercifully relieve the courts of wasted time and effort, which, thus far has been accessing it’s only practical exit out of this maze: that is thru’ the (often opportunistic) compromise option. This quandary has thus far been a viable avenue for corruption and opportunism in our justice system which, by its easy stance on Perjury, is actually encouraging the practise and tainting the judicial process.

1 Like

jmale (sdsd) 07 March 2010

Sathyama Jayathe ! Innocents will never face any issues. Our great law will protect us. Mera Bharat Mahan !

Having said this (lol .. lmao)

My advice: get a gun / cynide and use it against all their family members not just your better half :).

Take care of evidence:
Phone( simcards registered in dead people's name - destroy sim card after job + even the mobile (because even IMEI no can be tracked) ), if you are using hitmen get them from outside town( north get south south get north),do not show face , get small number of people .. 2 maximum (large groups r not effective)
if you have enough cash pay police and get the job done by them (yep .. :) ), if you are such a cash cow, then do one thing .. get arrested n go to jail and do all the above and below mentioned points from there, after mission is executed + 2 weeks come out n go to a long picnic not with parents (let your parents go alone)

its better to face a murder charges in court than 498a

i will explain how: court is full of corrupt people .. after the murder .. you will be in jail (if chargesheeted - if you dont cover your tracks - if you dont get AB (its easy to get for murder than in 498a :) )) for some time .. if you are such a nut that you have not taken care of above, i suggest surrender in court with media - cry and say that you are being framed and get bail - enquire about the judge and APP - bail will be easy - then pay some bribe to Additional PP .. he will not oppose bail . once you are out of bail .. then its very easy .. to break the case ..

in jail - eat special food (you have to pay), there will be god fathers - be friendly - but dont be a jerk and start showing off - like dont tell everyone you are Sun tuzu - keep mouth shut and cry (good for your eyes) , stay in addmision ward (not with criminal - there will be brokers - mostly the doctors - they will ask 5000 you say ok - pay in instalments), dont fight with anyone, if your jail has games like carrom play it, listen to other's stories and develop your knowledge - question how they could have escaped, dont do manual job in Jail (even if police hits you - earn respect), speak in english to jail supernindent, and do excercise ( join the long timers - foreign nationals for drugs - they will teach you new techniques in excercising)
- dont drink in jail - sleep properly - smile and be merry - but if attacked (not threatened, but attacked) break the opposite guys head (he should not die though :) ) - you can get hospital for this :) .. - study - think of big thing, real big things, you will be surprised how Jail can teach you - yours is a petty case - but you are in a place better than 1000... IIT/IIMs puttogether - make best use of it .. like I went to the meditation hall too :) !! and argued the concepts the teachers told us in english ; the astronishment of other undertrails was so much - i earned respect - I have been to many countries - seen many great things .. but let me tell you mate, nothing like Jail .. I love Jail :) !! ..

God has choosen you to undergo this training (not punishment) for some purpose - search that purpose.

there are many ways to get out of jail .. medical (giving money to jail people - they will take you to hospital - where you can eat sleep study etc - dont flirt with the nurses .. remember dog :) .. they are there for service not for fun .. they are not 498a wifes )
consult a advocate before and after you do the thing .. and be carefull with the advocate .. he should not blackmail you .. plan everything ..

this route:

no need of divorce - no need to fear or running behind dogs -You dont have to waster n years, get into depression or watch your parents age out and die ..

and during murder case,its you vs police( who dont really care after chargesheet and who are overloaded represented by the Additional PP who is generally corrupt to the core) .. but during 498a its you vs pack of real big dirty dogs( represented by efficient lawyer who will take money from both sides)

P/s: my advice is not logically arranged, not properly worded, i just wrote what came to my mind, hey you are free to ignore it - you have n number of dear advocate friends to advice you -follow them - iam not pro/against anyone advice - i wont debate if anyone contradicts me (no time :( ) !! - Just remember (convict) Rathore is f***king abha rathore in AC room, while you are reading this :) !!

1 Like

Carlisle Collins (Samaritan) 08 March 2010

Hmmm … Strong-spirited words; no doubt written under influence of strong “spirits”! Well, being a drinking man myself, I can appreciate the drunken logic … Hic! But; Pray, tell me: Why bother with the gun and cyanide when you could assassinate the Mark in court – using our (in)Justice System’s very own indigenous Weapons of Mass Emasculation: The pseudo-cops, pseudo-Tribunal, pseudo-testimony, and ethically flexible pseudo-advocates! And, Oh! Lest I forget, plenty of Money-Honey to sway deliberations in your favor. I was told a long time ago that India is where the Impossible becomes the Possible – for a price! Lord! Have we truly become a legion of harlots in a disgraceful enterprise masquerading as nuns?

Leave a reply

Recent Topics

Related Threads

Popular Discussion

Browse by Category