Court serves notice to woman for false evidence

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.

 

Source : http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chandigarh/Court-serves-notice-to-woman-for-false-evidence/articleshow/5337893.cms

Man dumps wife after she gets him bail in dowry case

 

A man from Bhopal, who was remanded to police custody in connection with a dowry case, dumped his Amdavadi wife after she got him and his parents released on bail.

The metropolitan court, that ordinarily does not grant bail in such a case, had taken into consideration the wife's request after she claimed that her husband had agreed to take her back.

According to case details, Yogini Khawani, a 29-year-old resident of Vejalpur, had married Amin Awani in 2003.

Soon after her marriage she went to Bhopal along with her husband, where her in-laws stayed. After a while, Yogini's in-laws reportedly began seeking dowry.

Meanwhile, Yogini became pregnant and delivered a baby girl which led to further harassment.

Yogini got pregnant again twice. But both these times, her in-laws allegedly forced her to abort the foetus in Bhopal.

When the situation spiralled out of control, Yogini came back to her parents' house in Vejalpur and lodged a complaint against her husband and in laws  with the Mahila Crime Branch.

A team from the Crime Branch arrested Amin and his parents in Bhopal and brought them to Ahmedabad on November 28.

The next day, they were produced before the court of the urgent metropolitan magistrate who granted them two days in police remand.

After the remand ended, the police produced the three before metropolitan magistrate G M Patel on December 2.

There, Yogini submitted in writing that she and her in-laws had reached a compromise.

She wrote: "If the judge wants to give them bail, I have no objection."

Following this, the judge granted bail to Awanis under the condition that they would mark their presence at the Mahila Police Station in Karanj on the 20th of each month.

After getting bail, the Awanis however returned to Bhopal without taking Yogini along.

When the Khawanis realised this, they approached their advocate Gulab Khan Pathan.

Said Pathan, "The Khawanis came to me two days ago and informed me that the compromise turned out to be a sham.

"The Awanis left behind Yogini. As the terms of compromise has been breached, we are thinking of filing a bail cancellation petition before the sessions court."

A person close to the Khawanis said the family will try to solve the dispute again on December 20 when the Awanis are expected to arrive at the police station.

 

Sources : http://www.ahmedabadmirror.com/index.aspx?page=article&sectid=3&contentid=20091217200912170311132043d6c073b&sectxslt=#ftr2

Wrongly jailed for 10 yrs, man gets Rs 1L

Shibu Thomas, TNN 2 September 2009, 08:32am IST

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Tuesday asked the Maharashtra government to pay Rs 1 lakh as compensation to a 40-year-old man who languished in prison for over 10 years for a crime he didn't commit.

Malegoan resident Bapu Mali was in jail for five years as an undertrial battling rape and murder charges. Even after the trial court acquitted him, Mali spent five more years in prison as he didn't pay the bail amount when his case went into appeal.

"This is a sorry state of affairs," a division bench of Justice Bilal Nazki and Justice A R Joshi said, while upholding the trial court order acquitting Mali. "Not only the prosecuting agency but also the courts are involved (for Mali languishing in jail). This is a reflection on our own system which needs to be corrected."

The court, in its order, also framed guidelines for the trial courts in such cases and said that the sessions judge who didn't comply with the rules will be liable for departmental inquiry and even contempt of court. "A person who is acquitted should not remain in jail even for an (extra) day," said the judges.

"But many poor persons are unable to furnish the bail amount and remain in jail," advocate Yug Chaudhry, who was appointed as an amicus curiae (friend of the court) said. The HC asked the sessions judges to release such accused on bail or a personal bond; and, in case the sessions court decides to send the accused back to jail, the judge has to furnish the information to the HC.

TOI, in its edition dated August 17, 2009 reported the case of the 35-year-old man who was in prison for over five years despite being acquitted of the criminal charges against him. The court had directed the state to pay him Rs 100,000 as compensation. Subsequently, the HC asked the state to find out if there were other such prisoners and Mali's case came to light.

source : http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-4961723,prtpage-1.cms

Protection from 498A for ‘tortured’ in-laws

Protection from 498A for 'tortured' in-laws

TAPAS GHOSH

Calcutta, Dec. 16: A man so afraid his wife might file a false dowry case against him that he would torture his parents at her behest today earned rare immunity for his family from a domestic violence law said to be loaded against husbands and in-laws. Justice P.K. Chattopadhyay of Calcutta High Court issued an order barring Beauty Saha, 27, from filing a complaint under Section 498A against husband Prasanta, 32, and in-laws Prafulla Kumar and Swapna Saha after a tearful outburst turned the case on its head. The court was hearing a petition filed by 74-year-old Prafulla, a government pensioner from Barrackpore, over police inaction on a complaint filed by him against his son and daughter-in-law when Prasanta broke down and blurted out the "real reason" for mentally and physically torturing his parents. "The truth is that I am helpless. I have been doing my wife's bidding all along lest she carry out her threat to lodge a false case of domestic violence under Section 498A against me," Prasanta said, going down on his knees with hands folded. When Justice Chattopadhyay asked him why he had arranged for a lawyer to represent his wife if he cared for his parents, the unemployed man said: "I have so far done whatever my wife has asked me to do." Prasanta later requested the court to provide him with legal assistance to contest any counter-allegation by his wife. "I am sure she will find new ways to torture us as soon as we reach home," he said. The court ordered the officer-in-charge of Titagarh police station to arrest Beauty if any member of the family lodged a complaint of torture by her. Section 498A, which deals with "cruelty on housewives by husbands and in-laws", has been the subject of debate because of a glut of allegedly false cases filed by women trying to either use it as a tool for blackmail or settle personal scores. Organisations of husbands and in-laws facing false dowry cases are now common across the country. Beauty's counsel Pushpal Satpathy contested the allegations. He accused Prasanta of maligning his wife under pressure from his parents. Prasanta and Beauty had a love marriage three-and-a-half years ago and have since been living off the elder Saha's pension. The couple have a one-and-a-half-year-old daughter. According to Prafulla's counsel Soumyajit Bhatta, Prasanta and Beauty started mentally and physical torturing his client and his wife Swapna, 64, last July, in a bid to grab the family property. "My client has a two-storey house on a four-cottah plot at Nonachandanpukur, under Barrackpore police station. His son and daughter-in-law have been torturing him and his wife for months, pressuring them to write the property in their names," the lawyer said. On November 15, the couple needed medical attention after an alleged assault by Beauty. Bhatta submitted a doctor's prescription to support the allegation. "On November 19, my client filed a general diary with Titagarh police station. But the police took no action and the torture continued," the lawyer said.

 

source : http://www.telegraphindia.com/1091217/jsp/frontpage/story_11876635.jsp

2,715 cases of abuse registered in Ahmedabad

Friday, December 11, 2009 8:38:00 AM

Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo must be obtained from www.3dsyndication.com.

2,715 cases of abuse registered in Ahmedabad

S Krishnan / DNA

The Gujarat State Human Rights Commission (SHRC) has expressed serious concerns over increasing incidents of crime and domestic violence against women. The commission conducted a study on the number of cases of atrocities against the weaker sections of the society, particularly against people belonging to scheduled caste (SC) and scheduled tribe (ST) across the state. The SHRC study revealed that the number of crime against women in Gujarat has gone up to 16,067 in 2008 from 12,602 recorded in 2001. Ahmedabad city tops the list with 2,715 crimes in 2008, followed by Surat (629), Junagadh (607), Bhavnagar (601), Rajkot rural (492) and Banaskantha (426). In the past one year alone, as many as 359 cases of rape, 1,041 cases of kidnapping, 284 cases of murder, 857 cases of molestation, 1,840 cases of suicide, 3,166 cases of accidental deaths, 28 cases of dowry deaths and 6,093 incidents involving physical and mental torture of women were registered in different parts of the state. In 2007-2008, the SHRC said it received, "as many as 117 complaints relating to various crimes committed against women. These included complaints of rape, kidnapping, murder, gender bias, dowry deaths, demand for dowry and exploitation." The commission received 67 more complaints in 2007-2008 as compared to 2006-07. A total of 1,159 cases relating to atrocity committed against SCs and another 199 cases of atrocity against STs were reported from across the state in 2007-2008. The SHRC received 37 complaints of atrocity against the SC/ST communities, of which 27 had been disposed off.  The commission had recommended the authorities concerned to take action against the offenders and protect the weaker sections of the society. Referring to incidents of violation by human rights by the policemen, the Navsarjan Trust had recommended the higher authorities to initiate department inquiry and punitive action against 'erring' cops.  According to a source in the SHRC, the commission received as many as 394 cases of violation in 2007-08, which included 91 cases relating to 'misuse of power' (by the police), 23 cases of false implication and another 233 cases where the police failed to take legal measures. Kantilal Parmer, a member of the Navsarjan Trust, said, "There has been an increase in the number of cases relating to molestation, sexual exploitation and dowry, resulting in suicide and accidental deaths. Moreover, investigation done by the law enforcement agencies in such cases is halfhearted, which is also one of the reasons why a lot of complaints are not filed at the police stations. For most women, finding a public prosecutor is a challenge." Incidentally, to mark Human Rights Day on Thursday, the manhole workers' unions organised a human chain and staged a demonstration near Town Hall. The unions called for a joint platform for taking action against injustice. Zakir Qazi, member of the Swasthya Suraksha Mandal, said, "The demonstration is staged to make people aware about their rights. How can we call the state Swarnim Gujarat?"   Source : http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_2715-cases-of-abuse-registered-in-ahmedabad_1322500

Self-immolation bid 'to teach in-laws a lesson' backfires

http://www.mid-day.com/news/2009/dec/071209-attempted-suicide-woman-booked.htm

Cops book woman for attempting suicide after they find no harassment 

A woman who set herself ablaze after a quarrel with her in-laws has been booked for attempting suicide, as the police believe she did it only to get her way by dangling the sword of the domestic violence law over her husband's parents.

Mary Sunitha (35), who was admitted to the Victoria hospital burns ward, told the police that she had set herself on fire because she was unable to bear the harassment she was subjected to by her in-laws.

At first the police thought it was another case of dowry harassment, but investigations by Assistant Sub Inspector Shanth Rajaiah made them change their opinion. Now Sunitha can be sentenced to a year's imprisonment by the court for attempting suicide.

Denied expenses

The police said Sunitha used to spend most of her time outside the home, which had irked her in-laws. They said though Sunitha and her husband, Stephen Raj, worked with a private firm and earned well, she would give her in-laws not more than Rs 300 per month for their expenses.

The police said one day Sunitha's father-in-law had had enough and decided to talk to her. He objected to her attitude towards the home and scolded her for spending her time outside.

Playing with fire

The police said Sunitha decided to "teach her in-laws a lesson" by attempting suicide as that meant they could be booked for domestic violence. The relevant law holds the in-laws responsible for pushing their son's wife towards suicide in case they have subjected her to mental or physical harassment.

Sunitha doused herself with kerosene and set herself ablaze. Stephen Raj, with the help of neighbours, rushed her to a private hospital and later shifted her to Victoria, where she is said to be out of danger.

Assistant Sub Inspector Rajaiah of the Gangammana Gudi police station investigated the case, in the course of which he also recorded Sunitha's statement, and concluded that taking the extreme step was unwarranted in the circumstances. The officer found Sunitha's actions directed only towards putting members of the family in trouble. 

After consulting his seniors, Rajaiah booked her for attempted suicide. 

False cases on rise

A senior judicial officer, who did not want to be named, said of late a majority of dowry harassment and domestic violence cases were turning out to be abuse of the law by women who were using it as a tool to blackmail husbands or in-laws. "A rough estimate is that over 80 per cent of such cases are fake and result in acquittal of those accused of domestic violence," said the judicial officer.

In the law book
Attempt to suicide is treated in Sec 309 of IPC
Whoever attempts to commit suicide and does any act towards the commission of such offence, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for term which may extend to one year (or with fine, or with both).

Lower court issues bailable warrant against 5-year-old for not appearing as a witness in a sexual harassment case

Lower court issues bailable warrant against 5-year-old for not appearing as a witness in a sexual harassment case

No one is out of the purview of India's justice system, not even five-year-old kids. A lower court in Delhi issued a bailable warrant against a five-year-old girl for not deposing in a case of sexual harassment. Interestingly, the case was filed by the girl's mother against one of her neighbours and the girl was mentioned as an eye witness.

The incident took place in New Usmanpur police station area in June this year. A case of sexual harassment was registered against Sunil alias Sonu after the mother of the five-year-old alleged that her daughter was sexually assaulted by him.

Metropolitan Magistrate Shivali Sharma issued a bailable warrant for the girl after she and her mother failed to appear before the court to record their statement.

The court has now directed the two to appear before the court on December 10, the next date of the hearing.

"We need to record the statement of the girl and her mother. The accused has already been arrested and produced before the court, but without their statement the case cannot move ahead," said a police official.

The New Usmanpur police refused to comment on development in the case. MiD DAY tried to contact the SHO RK Khatana, but all calls to his mobile phone went unanswered.

The court has directed the investigating officer of the case to inform the two to depose before the court on the next date of hearing.

source : http://timesofindia.hotklix.com/link/entertainment/celebs/My-CEO-framed-blackmailed-me

Atit
Pune
--
Some goals are so worthy, it's glorious even to fail
http://siff-pune.blogspot.com/
http://mafq.wordpress.com/
SOLO LEH RIDE : Pictures and Videos.
http://picasaweb.google.com/atit.rajpara
and
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=atitrajpara#g/u

Fwd: Now Indian Monkeys also come under the DV act . :-)

Just shows how dumb the average villager is in India . No wonder the are fleeced by the netas.

*-------------------------------------------------------------------*

http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20091117/808/tnl-orissa-villagers-file-case-for-femal.html

Orissa villagers file case for female monkey!

Tue, Nov 17 01:45 PM

Bhubaneshwar (Orissa), Nov 17 (ANI): In a bizarre development, residents of a village near Bhubaneshwar, Orissa, have filed a case against a male monkey for attempting to attack and kill a female monkey and its newborn.

The case was filed at a police station near the village.

Villagers said in their complaint that the male monkey- Raja had been consistently trying to attack the female monkey- Jhumri and its dear newborn at Astaranga.

Police have registered a case under three sections of the Indian Penal Code, which includes section 363 (kidnapping), 366 (abducting for slavery) and 507 (criminal intimidation by anonymous communication) and 511 (punishment for attempting to commit offences).

"If a female will place a complaint before me about her son going to be kidnapped or murdered by anyone, then a cognizable offence under section 366, 363, 507 and 511 of the Indian Penal Code will be registered. The accused and his associates would also be arrested and necessary police protection would be given," said Jatindra Kumar Das, a police official.

According to the complaint filed before the Police, Raja had already killed its first child and was now hunting down its second baby as well. (ANI)