The 498A Survival Portal


We shall do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just.                    –John F Kennedy


The CrPC amendments curtail the power of police to arrest.

Click the link below to know more.

CrPC Amendments


If you’d like to know about Section 498A and how this blog came into existence, please continue reading. If you are already entangled in Section 498A and are here looking for help, jump to the 498A Survival Guide by scrolling down to it.

A decade ago, as a tradition bound Non Resident Indian living in the US, I settled for an Indian bride. She walked into my life in the US with motives at odds with mine…which led to conflicts and strife. An year later, unable to bear her presence in my life any more, I divorced her in the US and broke off all contacts with her.

Some years had passed since I last saw her and I was looking forward to a quieter and steadier future as she was no longer an unsettling part of my life. I assumed that as she got her American green card through me, she would move on with her life in the US and won’t harbor any ill-will towards me. That assumption was a fantasy.

Out of the blue, in 2006, my ex-wife flew back to India and accused me and my family of subjecting her to cruelty and domestic violence under India’s much abused domestic violence and dowry law, Section 498A. Without verifying any of her silly accusations, Indian policemen arrested my family on a Friday morning. Fridays are reserved by Indian cops to handle 498A cases. They arrest the accused on Friday mornings and then indulge in some foot-dragging till the evening in the police station. With the courts closed over the weekend, the accused — I like to call them victims — remain trapped in the paws of the cops. The cops spend all weekend intimidating the victims and by the time the sun rises on a Monday morning, these confounded and traumatized people are ready to pay a “settlement” to escape from the torturous clutches of the Indian criminal justice system. The tough ones and those who can’t pay remain entrapped in the Indian criminal justice system for years to come. Acquittals in 498A cases occur after the victims of this extortion racket endure long drawn trials lasting years. Convictions are the exceptions, unless there is overwhelming evidence. This was the established pattern of outcome in 498A cases since the introduction of this pernicious law.

After hearing about my family’s arrest, I chose to remain in the US.  My lawyer warned me that if I returned to India, I’d be jailed and worse, lose all chances of becoming an American citizen — I realized that the 498A placed my American citizenship at stake.

Back at the police station, with my family in the callous hands of corrupt cops, my ex-wife’s father demanded a $100,000 (USD) from them to close the case. This amount was the set rate extorted from non-resident Indians to settle 498A cases. When my family refused to “settle”,  they were produced in a local court and the corrupt judge jailed them in an attempt to force my return to India and “settle” the case. Obviously, the judge and the cops were promised a cut in the “settlement”.

Stranded in the US and unable to aid my jailed family in any way, I rapidly hit rock bottom and began to shed tears. It was at that instant that a light went on in my head. I realized that 498A was just an extortion racket. In reality it has nothing to do with justice, domestic violence, or the law and here’s why: Peddling 498A benefited Indian politicians as they could pander to the women’s vote bank. The cops made out like bandits  from the bribes gotten from accusers and the “settlements” extorted from the accused. And the legal fraternity, along with the lower judiciary, profited from the 498A Jail and Bail Industry (the lawyers protested the most when the CrPC amendments were introduced in 2009).

For the sake of the skeptics, I digress to show the valuation of the 498A Jail and Bail Industry. The numbers are numbing:

  •  100,000 498A cases are filed each year, per the NCRB (many cases go unreported so the actual figure is higher)
  •  $5,000 Dollars (Indian Rs 2 Lakhs) at the minimum, is paid to settle each case.
  •  Total money spent in dollars =  $500,000,000 (100,000 cases * $5,000) USD

That’s half a BILLION in US Dollars that flows through the Indian criminal justice system each year just from 498A cases. And my estimate is very low as many cases go unreported, and the money used to “settle” each case can range from $2000 to over $200,000 — the  amounts extorted depending upon the affluence of the accused.

A week had passed since my family was jailed and taking stock of the situation in my apartment, I understood that I was trapped in an extortion racket of national proportions. I decided to fight but awaited the eventual release of my family as a first step. They were released on bail after enduring 11 days of captivity.

Once they were out, I turned to the Internet seeking help and information to learn more about this extortion racket. I came across SIFF web sites and got a lot of support and advice from their wonderful volunteers. But the information they posted online on the laws of arrest in India and 498A in general was incorrect — I knew it instinctively as all the sites parroted that the police had the unrestricted power to arrest once a 498A  complaint was registered.

I just couldn’t believe that a democracy whose national motto was “Satyameva Jayate” would frame its laws with the intent to oppress its citizens…my disbelief aroused my curiosity.

At this stage, I read a book written by Prof Som K Shah calledFaith Belied. It mentioned a judgment of the Indian Supreme Court which prohibited arbitrary arrests. Intrigued, I delved into Indian court web sites to learn about Indian laws. I quickly unearthed judgments on the laws governing arrests and the rights of the accused. Reading these judgments, I realized that the Indian criminal justice system was acting in contravention of Indian laws when dealing with 498A cases. It is easy to explain how this happened: Over the decades, a belief was propagated in India that the police had the outright authority to arrest anyone implicated in a criminal case and corrupt policemen did so with impunity. This belief remained unquestioned and was promoted by police officers and lawyers.

Unfortunately, these same beliefs were packaged and presented to the public as facts at web sites of organizations committed to fighting 498A. I created this site/blog to dispel these beliefs and raise awareness of the laws and judgments which protect the rights of Indians though posts at this site. Over a span of several months, I devoted hours each day to reading and compiling judgments and articles about Indian laws. That’s how I learned about the right to due process in India.

Due process lays down that the procedure for depriving a person of his life or liberty must be lawful, reasonable, fair, and just. Due process means that no police officer has the right or the authority to effect the arrest of an individual merely because the person has been accused in a criminal case. Every member of the judiciary is also duty bound to respect the right to due process and cannot automatically send individuals to jail on account of being produced in a court room by the police.

Above all, Article 21 of the Indian Constitution asserts the importance of due process. It says:  “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”.

You can read more about the right to due process here.

The Supreme Court of India enforced this right to due process and the right against arbitrary arrest in Joginder Kumar Vs State of UP in 1994.  This judgment explicitly states that:

“No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing. The justification for the exercise of it is quite another. The police officer must be able to justify the arrest apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lock-up of a person cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a police officer in the interest of protection of the constitutional rights of a citizen and perhaps in his own interest that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person’s complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter.

This is the judgment Prof Som K Shah wrote about in his book; I owe him for the head start he gave me through his book.

Sadly, despite the existence of this order, the police and the lower courts colluded and jailed hundreds of thousands of innocent Indians accused under 498A for over a decade. I am amazed that this fact doesn’t seem to bother anyone in this country of a billion people.

Fortunately, the amendments made to the Indian criminal procedure code (CrPC) in 2009 finally incorporated the orders of this judgment into the criminal procedure code.

After accumulating a pile of information and reading hundreds of judgments, I condensed all that I learned into the 498A Survival Guide, and posted it here. I also worked hard to convince fellow activists of the importance of Joginder Kumar Vs State of UP to end arrests by the police in 498A cases. As beliefs in the powers of the police to arrest were ingrained, it took a while, but I succeeded through persistence. Afterwards, I made several revisions to the 498A Survival Guide to keep it updated. It remains the definitive guide to surviving a 498A case since the time I posted it. Many victims have sworn that if it hadn’t been for it, they wouldn’t have fought or won their cases.

Over time, I’ve done my best to keep this site and its contents updated, but due to a punishing work and travel schedule, I haven’t been very successful at doing so. Also, I know that grammatical errors litter my posts and writings. I hope to eliminate these errors in the future. With 500+ posts, that is a lot of editing to do…and I’m trying.

The good news is the effect the passage of the CrPC Amendments had on the Jail and Bail Industry.  Click here to see how lawyers organized protests against the CrPC amendments. The amendments took the sting out of the 498A experience, as they prohibit arrests for offenses carrying sentences of less than 7 years. I believe that the Jail and Bail Industry is now heading into a recession.

But the fight isn’t over yet. The venal Indian establishment is trying to revive the Jail and Bail Industry by extending the sentence in 498A cases to 7 years or more. If they succeed in doing so, the CrPC amendments will no longer apply to 498A cases and the whole saga of arrests, jail and bail will start all over again.

The only way to end this tyranny is to fight using the RTI Act and having the courage, resilience, and the fortitude to resist the calls to pay bribes and make the case go away. Also, the judiciary falls under the RTI Act and know that the magistrates who summon you to face charges are not silent spectators. They must apply their heads to see if the accusations in the FIR (police complaint) constitute a crime.

I wrote the 498A Survival Guide to give those trapped in 498A cases hope and information to stand and fight. For thousands and maybe more, my work has been the only thing that stood between despair and hope. I believe that I may have succeeded in my efforts, but I can’t present any tangible evidence in the form of numbers or statistics.

Finally, for those who are wondering: I was never arrested. I  didn’t pay a penny to the cops or my ex-wife. And despite the odds, I stand holding my cherished trophy — my American passport.



If you are visiting this site for the first time, please don’t be overwhelmed by the amount of information contained here. This information is empowering. It will inform you about Indian laws, your rights, and you’ll learn about the venality of the Indian criminal justice system.

Start with the The 498A Survival Guide and the rest will fall into place.

  1. The 498A Survival Guide: This 50+ page handout will help you defend yourself in your cases. It also has information detailing judgments which protect basic rights in India. (Updated Apr/2008)
  2. Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP – 1994: This Supreme Court judgment resulted from a writ of Habeas Corpus and it defines the powers of the police to arrest. You will be surprised to know how limited the powers of the Indian police to arrest truly are. If you are unable to get anticipatory bail, this judgment can protect you from an illegal arrest by the police. The recent CrPC amendment to Section 41, is the formal incorporation of this judgment into the Indian penal code.

  3. Understand The Right To Due Process:  This is the principle that the government must respect all of the legal rights that are owed to a citizen in accordance with the law, and holds the government subservient to the law of the land.
  4. Srinivasulu Vs State Of AP-2007:  The Supreme Court of India has stated that:  “Consequences of cruelty which are likely to drive a woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health, whether mental or physical of the woman is required to be established in order to bring home the application of Section 498A IPC”. After the FIR is filed, read the FIR and question the cops on the basis for the applicability of 498A to your case, as given in this judgment. Most FIRs are a concoction of lies with no coherence or reason in them.

  5. SC Explains Anticipatory Bail – 2009 – This judgment explains the rules governing the granting of anticipatory bail. Everything you need to know is present in this judgment,

  6. The Final Report Of Film Actor Prashanth’s 498A Case (pdf is at the end of the post) – This article is the Final Report of film actor Prashanth. Read it to understand what a final report is.

  7. Justice Regupathy: Mechanical Judicial Remand Is ILLEGAL

  8. Justice Kailash Gambhir (Delhi HC) Guidelines On Prosecution Of 498A Cases

  9. Delhi Police Circular Forbidding Arrests In 498A Cases Without DCP’s Permission

  10. Hyderabad Police Circular Forbidding Arrests in 498A Cases Without DCP’s Permission

  11. Judgments of Justice Dhingra: Justice Shiv Narain Dhingra of the Delhi High Court has empowered victims of 498A cases with his judgments. Read these  to inform and motivate  yourselves to fight this racket.

  12. Chennai HC Justice Regupathy’s Orders On 498A Arrests

  13. SC Explains Conditions For The Quash Of An FIR – 2009

  14. 498A Counter Cases To Fight Back With – Compiled By Rudy

  15. The Important Sections Of The Dowry Prohibition Act
  16. AP Police’s Procedures for 498A Investigations
  17. The 498A FAQ (link to another blog)

498A Survival Guide In Regional Languages :

The Indian police force plays a huge role in this extortion racket. Read the judgments and articles about the Indian police to inform, educate and empower yourselves.

For immediate help and advice, contact:

The Supreme Court of India is the ultimate arbiter of the law on account of the The Doctrine Of Binding Precedent. Article 142 of the Constitution declares that any order of the Supreme Court is enforceable throughout the territory of India and article 144 mandates that all civil (police) and judicial authorities shall act in aid of the Supreme Court.

Repository Of Information:


Compendium Of Judgments:

For Non Resident Indians (NRIs):

Documents on the Indian Police:

CBI Manuals:The CBI is the premier investigative agency of our country and I have a lot of respect for the capabilities of these guys. I just wish they would be a little more diligent before filing red corner notices against NRIs accused in dowry cases. In a sense they are insulting their own intelligence.
These manuals are a great source for detailing the process of investigation of cognizable offenses and also the laws of arrest. These are in the public domain (Internet) and I stumbled across them by accident; a gift from the gods. I believe that these manuals can serve as a good reference to file RTIs against corrupt police officers. Read these documents and you will get a clear idea of what the police are actually supposed to do upon the registration of cognizable offenses.

RTI is a powerful tool to combat the abuse of 498A. The police are required to answer within 48Hrs when an RTI is filed about a person who is arrested. Read about the basics of filing an RTI here:

Misc documents/links/News:


Finally, regardless of what the 498A wives do to you, if you are innocent, you will prevail.

Read the disclaimer on the lower right hand side of the page.


The content of this page is copyrighted.

The content of this blog is copyrighted. You are required to obtain prior permission before locally hosting or reproducing online or in print, any or part of the content. You are welcome to directly link to the content from your site.

Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Registered & Protected
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under:


curtail the power of police to make arrests, thereby preventing any abuse of power.

A Note from Prof Som K Shah

I was pleasantly surprised to see a comment from Prof Som K Shah. I thought I should share it with all of you. He talks about the effort he put into writing his book, and the actions he took to get this pernicious 498A law amended.

Of special interest is the real story of why this law came into effect. So due to him, I now know that the mother of pussy politics is Indira Gandhi, who brought this law into effect to pander to the women’s vote bank. Unfortunately she didn’t realize that it would devastate families across India for decades to come. And now, it comes as no surprise that the Congress/UPA govt resisted all amendments to this law. After all, why would a party of dynasties ever want to discard their own legacy, however vile it may be?

Here is Prof Shah’s note:

Som K. Shah March 15, 2015 at 10:35 am

Hi ! This Is Som K. Shah. After so many years I was delighted to see that sufferers under ghastly 498-A are standing up. When I wrote the book, which the author of this blog has so gracefully acknowledged, in 2004 it was taken for granted that 498-A was a Brahmastra that destroyed all young men and their families. I was drawn into it when a very close relation of mine went through the trauma. We fought and as the present author of the blog gleefully declares, we did not pay a single penny to anyone. Not only that I got a number of policemen hauled up for the arrest and attempt to blackmail. I wrote the book and sent 2000 free copies to Ministers, Judges, MPs and media and opinion makers. The then law Minister Shri Arun Jaitley promised that he would do something about it. But they lost the government and nothing happened. Finally it was in 2009 that the law was amended.
The author of this blog has done a lot of Yeoman service and deserves all the kudos. i salute to him. Unfortunately my book is out of print, Though it is now dated but if anybody wants a copy, I have a few pre-print copies and I can send the same to anyone who is interested in having it.

Now a little aside on how the law 498-A came into existence. After the death of Sanjay Gandhi there was a continuous battle between Indira Gandhi and her daughter-in-law Maneka Gandhi. At one time the daughter-in-law was thrown out of the house with bag and baggage but she stayed put on the roadside inviting media who made a big story out of it. This brought in a lot of adverse publicity for the Prime Minister. Since the elections were approaching, she was advised to enact a law favouring women so that she may not lose female vote bank. 498-A was thus enacted in a huff.


Supreme Court of India: No Automatic Arrests in 498A Cases


here is the judgment that made waves over the last few days. I’ll have more to say later, but for the moment, here is the judgment from the Supreme Court’s website:

Here are links to the judgement:

I hoped that Ranjana Kumari and the Indian commie dimwits will keep this peace, but I should have known better. They are back peddling their bullshit again, opposing this judgment. You can read about what they have to say here:

I will have a few things to say about the stand of these dimwits later.


Supreme Court of India
Arnesh Kumar vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 2 July, 2014
Bench: Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, Pinaki Chandra Ghose





(@SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.9127 of 2013)





Chandramauli Kr. Prasad

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter called as IPC) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The maximum sentence provided under Section 498-A IPC is imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and fine whereas the maximum sentence provided under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is two years and with fine.

Petitioner happens to be the husband of respondent no.2 Sweta Kiran. The marriage between them was solemnized on 1st July, 2007. His attempt to secure anticipatory bail has failed and hence he has knocked the door of this Court by way of this Special Leave Petition.

Leave granted.

In sum and substance, allegation levelled by the wife against the appellant is that demand of Rupees eight lacs, a maruti car, an air-conditioner, television set etc. was made by her mother-in-law and father-in-law and when this fact was brought to the appellant’s notice, he supported his mother and threatened to marry another woman. It has been alleged that she was driven out of the matrimonial home due to non- fulfilment of the demand of dowry.

Denying these allegations, the appellant preferred an application for anticipatory bail which was earlier rejected by the learned Sessions Judge and thereafter by the High Court.

There is phenomenal increase in matrimonial disputes in recent years. The institution of marriage is greatly revered in this country. Section 498-A of the IPC was introduced with avowed object to combat the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband and his relatives. The fact that Section 498-A is a cognizable and non-bailable offence has lent it a dubious place of pride amongst the provisions that are used as weapons rather than shield by disgruntled wives. The simplest way to harass is to get the husband and his relatives arrested under this provision. In a quite number of cases, bed-ridden grand-fathers and grand-mothers of the husbands, their sisters living abroad for decades are arrested. “Crime in India 2012 Statistics. published by National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs shows arrest of 1,97,762 persons all over India during the year 2012 for offence under Section 498-A of the IPC, 9.4% more than the year 2011. Nearly a quarter of those arrested under this provision in 2012 were women i.e. 47,951 which depicts that mothers and sisters of the husbands were liberally included in their arrest net. Its share is 6% out of the total persons arrested under the crimes committed under Indian Penal Code. It accounts for 4.5% of total crimes committed under different sections of penal code, more than any other crimes excepting theft and hurt. The rate of charge-sheeting in cases under Section 498A, IPC is as high as 93.6%, while the conviction rate is only 15%, which is lowest across all heads. As many as 3,72,706 cases are pending trial of which on current estimate, nearly 3,17,000 are likely to result in acquittal.

Arrest brings humiliation, curtails freedom and cast scars forever. Law makers know it so also the police. There is a battle between the law makers and the police and it seems that police has not learnt its lesson; the lesson implicit and embodied in the Cr.PC. It has not come out of its colonial image despite six decades of independence, it is largely considered as a tool of harassment, oppression and surely not considered a friend of public. The need for caution in exercising the drastic power of arrest has been emphasized time and again by Courts but has not yielded desired result. Power to arrest greatly contributes to its arrogance so also the failure of the Magistracy to check it. Not only this, the power of arrest is one of the lucrative sources of police corruption. The attitude to arrest first and then proceed with the rest is despicable. It has become a handy tool to the police officers who lack sensitivity or act with oblique motive.

Law Commissions, Police Commissions and this Court in a large number of judgments emphasized the need to maintain a balance between individual liberty and societal order while exercising the power of arrest. Police officers make arrest as they believe that they possess the power to do so. As the arrest curtails freedom, brings humiliation and casts scars forever, we feel differently. We believe that no arrest should be made only because the offence is non-bailable and cognizable and therefore, lawful for the police officers to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing, the justification for the exercise of it is quite another. Apart from power to arrest, the police officers must be able to justify the reasons thereof. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent and wise for a police officer that no arrest is made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness of the allegation. Despite this legal position, the Legislature did not find any improvement. Numbers of arrest have not decreased. Ultimately, the Parliament had to intervene and on the recommendation of the 177th Report of the Law Commission submitted in the year 2001, Section 41 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘Cr.PC), in the present form came to be enacted. It is interesting to note that such a recommendation was made by the Law Commission in its 152nd and 154th Report submitted as back in the year 1994. The value of the proportionality permeates the amendment relating to arrest. As the offence with which we are concerned in the present appeal, provides for a maximum punishment of imprisonment which may extend to seven years and fine, Section 41(1)(b), Cr.PC which is relevant for the purpose reads as follows:

“41. When police may arrest without warrant.-(1) Any police officer may without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant, arrest any person –

(a)x x x x x x

(b)against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed a cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years whether with or without fine, if the following conditions are satisfied, namely :-

(i) x x x x x

(ii) the police officer is satisfied that such arrest is necessary “

to prevent such person from committing any further offence; or

for proper investigation of the offence; or

to prevent such person from causing the evidence of the offence to disappear or tampering with such evidence in any manner; or

to prevent such person from making any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the police officer; or

as unless such person is arrested, his presence in the Court whenever required cannot be ensured,

and the police officer shall record while making such arrest, his reasons in writing:

Provided that a police officer shall, in all cases where the arrest of a person is not required under the provisions of this sub-section, record the reasons in writing for not making the arrest.

X x x x x x

From a plain reading of the aforesaid provision, it is evident that a person accused of offence punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years with or without fine, cannot be arrested by the police officer only on its satisfaction that such person had committed the offence punishable as aforesaid. Police officer before arrest, in such cases has to be further satisfied that such arrest is necessary to prevent such person from committing any further offence; or for proper investigation of the case; or to prevent the accused from causing the evidence of the offence to disappear; or tampering with such evidence in any manner; or to prevent such person from making any inducement, threat or promise to a witness so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or the police officer; or unless such accused person is arrested, his presence in the court whenever required cannot be ensured. These are the conclusions, which one may reach based on facts. Law mandates the police officer to state the facts and record the reasons in writing which led him to come to a conclusion covered by any of the provisions aforesaid, while making such arrest. Law further requires the police officers to record the reasons in writing for not making the arrest. In pith and core, the police office before arrest must put a question to himself, why arrest? Is it really required? What purpose it will serve? What object it will achieve? It is only after these questions are addressed and one or the other conditions as enumerated above is satisfied, the power of arrest needs to be exercised. In fine, before arrest first the police officers should have reason to believe on the basis of information and material that the accused has committed the offence. Apart from this, the police officer has to be satisfied further that the arrest is necessary for one or the more purposes envisaged by sub-clauses (a) to (e) of clause (1) of Section 41 of Cr.PC.

An accused arrested without warrant by the police has the constitutional right under Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India and Section 57, Cr.PC to be produced before the Magistrate without unnecessary delay and in no circumstances beyond 24 hours excluding the time necessary for the journey. During the course of investigation of a case, an accused can be kept in detention beyond a period of 24 hours only when it is authorised by the Magistrate in exercise of power under Section 167 Cr.PC. The power to authorise detention is a very solemn function. It affects the liberty and freedom of citizens and needs to be exercised with great care and caution. Our experience tells us that it is not exercised with the seriousness it deserves. In many of the cases, detention is authorised in a routine, casual and cavalier manner. Before a Magistrate authorises detention under Section 167, Cr.PC, he has to be first satisfied that the arrest made is legal and in accordance with law and all the constitutional rights of the person arrested is satisfied. If the arrest effected by the police officer does not satisfy the requirements of Section 41 of the Code, Magistrate is duty bound not to authorise his further detention and release the accused. In other words, when an accused is produced before the Magistrate, the police officer effecting the arrest is required to furnish to the Magistrate, the facts, reasons and its conclusions for arrest and the Magistrate in turn is to be satisfied that condition precedent for arrest under Section 41 Cr.PC has been satisfied and it is only thereafter that he will authorise the detention of an accused. The Magistrate before authorising detention will record its own satisfaction, may be in brief but the said satisfaction must reflect from its order. It shall never be based upon the ipse dixit of the police officer, for example, in case the police officer considers the arrest necessary to prevent such person from committing any further offence or for proper investigation of the case or for preventing an accused from tampering with evidence or making inducement etc., the police officer shall furnish to the Magistrate the facts, the reasons and materials on the basis of which the police officer had reached its conclusion. Those shall be perused by the Magistrate while authorising the detention and only after recording its satisfaction in writing that the Magistrate will authorise the detention of the accused. In fine, when a suspect is arrested and produced before a Magistrate for authorising detention, the Magistrate has to address the question whether specific reasons have been recorded for arrest and if so, prima facie those reasons are relevant and secondly a reasonable conclusion could at all be reached by the police officer that one or the other conditions stated above are attracted. To this limited extent the Magistrate will make judicial scrutiny.

Another provision i.e. Section 41A Cr.PC aimed to avoid unnecessary arrest or threat of arrest looming large on accused requires to be vitalised. Section 41A as inserted by Section 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2008(Act 5 of 2009), which is relevant in the context reads as follows:

“41A. Notice of appearance before police officer.-(1) The police officer shall, in all cases where the arrest of a person is not required under the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 41, issue a notice directing the person against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed a cognizable offence, to appear before him or at such other place as may be specified in the notice.

(2) Where such a notice is issued to any person, it shall be the duty of that person to comply with the terms of the notice.

(3) Where such person complies and continues to comply with the notice, he shall not be arrested in respect of the offence referred to in the notice unless, for reasons to be recorded, the police officer is of the opinion that he ought to be arrested.

(4) Where such person, at any time, fails to comply with the terms of the notice or is unwilling to identify himself, the police officer may, subject to such orders as may have been passed by a competent Court in this behalf, arrest him for the offence mentioned in the notice.

Aforesaid provision makes it clear that in all cases where the arrest of a person is not required under Section 41(1), Cr.PC, the police officer is required to issue notice directing the accused to appear before him at a specified place and time. Law obliges such an accused to appear before the police officer and it further mandates that if such an accused complies with the terms of notice he shall not be arrested, unless for reasons to be recorded, the police office is of the opinion that the arrest is necessary. At this stage also, the condition precedent for arrest as envisaged under Section 41 Cr.PC has to be complied and shall be subject to the same scrutiny by the Magistrate as aforesaid.

We are of the opinion that if the provisions of Section 41, Cr.PC which authorises the police officer to arrest an accused without an order from a Magistrate and without a warrant are scrupulously enforced, the wrong committed by the police officers intentionally or unwittingly would be reversed and the number of cases which come to the Court for grant of anticipatory bail will substantially reduce. We would like to emphasise that the practice of mechanically reproducing in the case diary all or most of the reasons contained in Section 41 Cr.PC for effecting arrest be discouraged and discontinued.

Our endeavour in this judgment is to ensure that police officers do not arrest accused unnecessarily and Magistrate do not authorise detention casually and mechanically. In order to ensure what we have observed above, we give the following direction:

All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41, Cr.PC;

All police officers be provided with a check list containing specified sub- clauses under Section 41(1)(b)(ii);

The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed and furnish the reasons and materials which necessitated the arrest, while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for further detention;

The Magistrate while authorising detention of the accused shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms aforesaid and only after recording its satisfaction, the Magistrate will authorise detention;

The decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing;

Notice of appearance in terms of Section 41A of Cr.PC be served on the accused within two weeks from the date of institution of the case, which may be extended by the Superintendent of Police of the District for the reasons to be recorded in writing;

Failure to comply with the directions aforesaid shall apart from rendering the police officers concerned liable for departmental action, they shall also be liable to be punished for contempt of court to be instituted before High Court having territorial jurisdiction.

Authorising detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court.

We hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or without fine.

We direct that a copy of this judgment be forwarded to the Chief Secretaries as also the Director Generals of Police of all the State Governments and the Union Territories and the Registrar General of all the High Courts for onward transmission and ensuring its compliance.

By order dated 31st of October, 2013, this Court had granted provisional bail to the appellant on certain conditions. We make this order absolute.

In the result, we allow this appeal, making our aforesaid order dated 31st October, 2013 absolute; with the directions aforesaid.






July 2, 2014.

Union of India Vs Mahaveer C. Singhvi (IFS) – The Devyani Khobragade String Pulling Case

Controversial Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade is very connected, wealthy, and has quite a controversial track record. Going by media reports, her powerful pop, Uttam Khobragade, has been pulling strings with impunity to advance her interests.

Let’s start with Preet Bharara’s (he’s in my list of heroes) complaint against her: US DOJ Complaint Against Devyani Khobragade

I watched Devyani speak in a YouTube video and wondered how a dumbass like her could land a coveted New York City posting.

Here’s the video I referred to:

“Medicine taught me the importance of hard work, blah, blah !!”     Eeesh !

At the start of her career, she landed in Germany by having her batch mate, Mahaveer C. Singhvi, bumped off the list.  The MEA retaliated against him when he protested.

“The mode of allotment was amended for the 1999 Batch in such a calculated fashion that Ms. Khobragade, who was at Serial No.7, was given her choice of German over and above the Respondent who was graded at two stages above her.

Whoa !! Talk about clout !!

Here’s the article from the Times Of India about this incident: MEA Bent Rules For Devyani Khobragade 

After Devyani’s unfairly treated batch mate, IFS officer Mahaveer Singhvi, sought and got redress in the Delhi High Court for dismissal from service, it looks like the crooks in the MEA sued him in the Indian Supreme Court where — fortunately — justice prevailed and he was reinstated.

Here’s Supreme Court Judgment:  Union of India Vs Mahaveer C. Singhvi (IFS)

“The mode of allotment was amended for the 1999 Batch in such a calculated fashion that Ms. Khobragade, who was at Serial No.7, was given her choice of German over and above the Respondent who was graded at two stages above her.


“Authorities were desperate to cover up the highly dubious and motivated manner in which the rules of allotment (of foreign language) were altered only in respect of the 1999 batch of IFS appointees in order to favour a particular candidate who was graded lower than Singhvi.”

Here are some links that reveal more about this strip-searched diplomat princess:

Questions needing answers:

  1. Uttam Khobragade has two daughters.  We know he stashed quite a bit for Devyani. What’s the amount he stashed for the other daugheter, SharmishtaKhobragade?
  2. How did Devyani land the New York City posting 3years after uncle?
  3. Who ordered the removal of the barricades around the US Embassy in Delhi? This happened after UttamKhobragade met with Sushil Kumar Shinde.
  4. How did a warrant against Sangeeta Richard get issued so quickly as Indian courts are notoriously slow?
  5. Where did she or her get the cash to own so much land around the country?
  6. Will the IT Dept open proceedings against her for tax evasion?


Some Things to Ponder About

What can be done to throw a light on this industry, and inform and empower innocent people?

  • Questions for Justice Dhingra: he did more than any one else to improve the lot of 498A victims. Get his views on 498A, criminal justice and investigation procedures, and what this mess has done to wreck the Indian criminal justice system.
  • Question for Former CJI MN Venkatachalliah:
    • Are the arrests of women or men documented in NCRB 498A statistics legal, when seen through the eyes of his judgment on Joginder Kumar Vs State of UP.
    • Magistrates remand automatically. Can they do that ?  What is the law on remand by magistrates?
  •  YS Dadwal of the Delhi Police:
  • Why did he prohibit arrests in 498A cases? What prompted him to issue the order.
  • Cops never investigate 498A accusations and file charge sheets.
  • What are the avenues of redress? Who do the accused approach to redress?
  • What is the procedure for investigations and gathering evidence in 498A cases? Get a copy of the procedures.
  • What is the procedure for filing a charge sheet? What are the different checkpoints to be documented?
  • What is the ratio of charge sheets filed in 498A cases to final reports dismissing the accusations since 2004 (Use RTIs)?
  • Questions for Indira Jaising (she claims to be a constitutional expert, but in reality, she is the leading Indian Feminazi)
    • What is Habeas Corpus?
    • What are the rules the police need to follow to arrest an Indian citizen?
    • Under what conditions can magistrate remand a person?
  • Best practices: Find people who won their case without getting into the court system. Tell their stories. What were the tools they used?
  • Budget for India’s judiciary is $43 Million. Corruption thrives by starving the judiciary of funds, and Indians of justice as the resources don’t exist to deliver justice in a country of a billion people. What is being done to reform the Indian judiciary?
  • Understand the size of this industry in Dollar amounts:

  • Connect the denial of justice to rape victims with the numbers of 498A and DV Act cases clogging the Indian courts. Thousands of rapists have escaped justice as the cops are geared to arrest people accused in 498A cases, than instigate and gather evidence capable of convicting rapists.
  • Why don’t the courts or cops punish women who abuse this law? The answer is simple: These women serve as the bait that lure the victims into the jaws of the criminal justice system. How else do lawyers, cops, and corrupt magistrates augment their income? Try to get the average number of cases in the portfolio of a Delhi HC lawyer. What’s the amount they charge to handle 498A cases?
  • Get the views of the Indian Feminazis on the arrests of thousands of women. Interview the likes of Ranjana Kumari and Indira Jaising. Get their views on record. What do they really want?
  • While the Feminazis and the criminal justice system is focused on 498A, what are the real issues affecting women that are escaping the attention of the public eye and the govt? (Think of sex trafficking and prostitution; infant mortality and maternity deaths)
  • Set up a website where people can discuss how they got things done without paying a bribe.
  • Create a website dedicated to listing corrupt public officials who demand bribes. Call it the Indian gallery of rogues.
  • Question Madhu Purnima Kishwar. Find out if these laws really help women. Get her opinion on who truly benefits from these laws.
  • What’s the common pattern of life or events for the 498A bridezillas, after the 498A cases they filed are over? Do they marry again? What are the numbers (statistics) of women who are now swatting flies on or, while awaiting the arrival of their 2nd prince charming?
  • Why is it easy to get tossed into the criminal justice system and so hard to get out? Are quash petitions the only way out of this mess?
  • Who is behind the law to allow women to be given a share of ancestral property? What studies were done? Who sent the file to the union cabinet? (I’d be surprised if Indira Jaising’s name didn’t come up. Use RTIs.) .  How was this bill brought to the Union Cabinet without any warning to the public? How is this a priority for the Union Cabinet, above farmer’s starvation deaths and terrorism issues the country is facing? What about police corruption and brutality? What about the much needed reforms in the police force? Despite the orders of the India Supreme Court, nothing has happened.
  • Thousands are arrested in 498A cases by the police, but the country’s security apparatus is unable to prevent terrorist attacks, or effectively investigate and prosecute terrorists after terrorist attacks take place. Are Indian cops only good for arresting innocent men and women accused in 498A cases?
  • This is not about men’s rights or women’s rights or 498A. This is about the ability of the justice delivery system to deliver justice. This is about looking at the the widespread rot in governance in India, at the state and national level.
  • Why the system won’t change: For the political parties, 498A plays into vote bank politics. Feminazis like Ranjana Kumari and Indira Jaising have convinced the Congress that enacting laws like 498A is in their interest as it attracts the women’s vote bank. The govt won’t clamp down on abuses  by the cops, as they are employees of the Indian public sector, which forms a HUGE vote bank. Punishing them for corruption and excesses is akin to draining the vote bank of votes. Besides, the Indian public shouldn’t forget that the police is a tool used by the establishment to maintain law and order, not serve and protect the public. The purpose of the police is to oppress the local population — a legacy of the colonial system — and nothing will be done to change it. Besides, the police serve their political masters well by containing public unrest (the police roughed up the people protesting against the establishment’s corruption), so why will the masters deprive their dogs of their easy pickings (498A victims)?
  • NGOs like AIDWA, Lawyer’s Collective, and CSR derive their funding (Indira Jaising was paid over $1,40,000 to write Staying Alive, an annual report on the DV Act by Unifem) and base their exist by playing pussy politics. They can’t be pressured to  change their attitudes unless the consequences of their actions — such as the arrests of thousands of women under 498A — are exposed and brought to the public’s attention and opprobrium (Indira Jaising, the self proclaimed human rights activist, had a woman from Delhi jailed for a month in Calcutta. The lady was released only after her NRI brother paid a $100,000. How is she a human rights activist if she can do this to an innocent woman?).


In 10 years, over 1 lakh rape accused walked free

In 10 years, over 1 lakh rape accused walked free

In 10 years, over 1 lakh rape accused walked free

Understanding The 498A and DV Act Industry



Rapes in India: The Duplicity of Ranjana Kumari of CSR

Ranjana Kumari, the fatuous Indian feminazi, charlatan, and director of the moribund Center for Social Research, is in the news again.

This time, she blares a silly theory about the increase in the incidence of rapes in the New York Times.

Rapes have increased at an alarming rate of roughly 25 percent in six years. Yet no one talks about measures to curb the increasing rates of sexual assaults in India. Instead, this country’s efforts on women’s empowerment are narrowly defined and focused on “protecting” women from  conflicts within the bedrooms of Indian homes–as this makes for good copy in the press, feeds the corrupt criminal justice system with new victims, and panders to the women’s vote bank. This is the reason I labeled these misdirected efforts at women’s empowerment in India as pussy politics.

Our dim witted feminazi, Ranjana Kumari, is a member of some standing in the club of practitioners of pussy politics in India. She is a cheerleader for strengthening laws like 498A and is against amending the clumsily drafted domestic violence act.

So what does this have to do with rapes?

In the New York Times article, Ranjana Kumari suggests that men regard women as a threat and challenge to their dominance in the paternalistic Indian society due to their increased visibility in public life that takes place when they attend schools and colleges; enter the work force  in strength; and choose their own spouses by bucking traditions.

I quote:

“This visibility is seen as a threat and a challenge,” said Ranjana Kumari, who runs the Center for Social Research in New Delhi.

That’s a load of crock and that’s because her views in this regard are silly, illogical, and seen through her cock-eyed lens of misandry.

Let’s look at her fatuous arguments from another angle. Ranjana Kumari argues that women are raped as men feel threatened by their rising presence and visibility in public life. Fine. But then, what about young girls and women trafficked into prostitution? These girls aren’t visible in public, yet they endure a rape with every customer they are forced to service. What does Ranjana Kumari have to say about that?

The answer is — nothing.

I just debunked her ditzy argument.

Before we move on, please look at the image below and think how you’d feel if this was a child you know:

Munni from Falkland Road

Feminazi’s like Ranjana Kumari have no empathy. They are in bed with the establishment and have access to power and privilege, all they need to do is play pussy-politics.

Getting back to the inanities on rape mouthed by our foremost of Feminazi … it’s not the increased visibility of women in public life that’s causing rapes in India to increase, but the absence of a credible, speedy, and competent criminal justice system which can arrest, try, and sentence perpetrators of rapes effectively. After all, it’s the existence of a competent criminal justice system that acts as deterrent to crime — any crime — in any country.

Statistics from the NCRB uphold my contention: Indian courts are clogged with frivolously filed 498A and DV Act cases. Over a 100,000 new 498A cases are filed each year. As Ranjana Kumari knows, they are frivolous cases with just 2% conviction rates. With cases like these clogging the Indian courts, how can rape victims expect to get timely justice?

Thanks to the efforts of pussy politicians like Ranjani Kumari, more women are arrested under laws like 498A than perpetrators of serious crimes like rapes. Please see a snippet of the stats from the NCRB  as a proof of my contention:

Here’s another statistic which shows that the chances of a rape to end in a trial have been declining:

Ranjana Kumari, I hope you understand that your actions have led to the denial of justice for thousands of sexually assaulted Indian women and little girls and women trafficked into prostitution. I hope you think of little Munni the next time you blare your misandry laced slogans.

So what are the women of the NCW doing about curbing rapes in India?

I believe its members rush from one atrocity against women to another and then … do nothing.

These women of the NCW  hold so much power and yet do so little to help the less fortunate women of India. Sadly, what they do want is more power and perks. Check out a snippet of their wish list I pulled from their web site:

These women are such a waste of oxygen.

Which brings me back to why I think Ranjana Kumari is such a charlatan.

Our Ranjana Kumari is married and her carnal calisthenics resulted in two offsprings. Her son is an “hospitality entrepreneur”, not sure what that means, but in a country like India it means that you can’t get there unless you have your head stuck up the read-end of the political establishment. That’s why I consider her to be a true hand maiden of the establishment … and she does the dirty work as a hand maiden. I digress to illustrate: when Delhi High Court’s Justice JD Kapoor condemned 498A in an unrelated judgment, our Ranjana Kumari was part of the sloganeering attack squad of Feminazis that barged into the Delhi High Court and protested against Justice Kapoor. Their number? 25 !  Our Ranjana Kumari is married, has kids, and yet somehow shouts about domestic violence and dowry abuse. How does she know? Hmm … isn’t shouting about women’s rights her profession? Isn’t she doing this for a pay check?  Since that’s the case, where’s the integrity in her actions?

Instead of mouthing inanities about the intolerance of men, how about she start talking about  reform ing the Indian criminal justice system which can deliver justice to rape victims and bring to book VVIPs involved in sexual exploitation of women? I know that can be hard, so what about taking on the silly khap panchayats?

Unfortunately, this is something she won’t do as it’ll lead to just one thing: the establishment’s boot on her fat butt, and the end of privileges, perks, and access that comes with pandering to the establishment. So please tell me, how is she a leader in the true struggle to empower the women of India?. Isn’t she a true charlatan?

It’s easier to mouth inanities than to fight the real fight. And our ditzy Ranjan Kumari has shown that she stand against corruption symbolically, but stand next to a corrupt person, such as the Congress party’s  Girija Vyas of the petrol pump scam fame, in substance.

Ranjana Kumari standing next to the corrupt Girija Vyas

In conclusion, I ask Ranjana Kumari to please have some shame, develop some empathy, and do victims of rapes in India a favor. She must stop playing pussy politics and seal her mouth — as nothing much flows from it except gutter detrimental to the progress of women’s rights in India.


Visitors Since Mar/14/07

  • 3,303,399

Cluster Map

Live Traffic


Top Rated Posts

Some Interesting Stats On Arrests Of Women

In 1930, the British govt arrested 17,000 women for their involvement in the Dandi Yatra (Salt March). During 1937 to 1947 (10 Years), they arrested 5,000 women involved in the freedom struggle. From 2004 to 2006, the govt of India arrested 90,000 women of all ages under 498A. On the average, 27,000 women per year are being arrested under this flawed law. These are stats from the NCRB.

Copyright Notice:

The content of this blog is copyrighted. You are required to obtain prior permission before locally hosting or reproducing online or in print, any or part of the content. You are welcome to directly link to the content from your site. Page copy protected against web site content infringement by Copyscape Registered & Protected Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.


The family of the writer was tortured by the Indian Police in an attempt to extort over a $100,000 by holding them in custody for over a week. The police, in cahoots with the magistrate and the PP, did this due to the ridiculous allegations made in a 498A case by his embittered ex-wife. She filed the case years after he and his family had last seen her. Thousands of 498A cases are filed each year in India by women seeking to wreak vengeance on their husbands and in-laws. Enormous sums are extorted from intimidated families implicated in these cases by corrupt Indian police officers and elements of the Indian judiciary. The author and his family haven't bribed any public official nor have they given in to the extortion. This blog aims to raise awareness of due process in India. The content of this blog constitutes, opinions, observations, and publicly available documents. The intent is not to slander or defame anyone or any institution and is the manifestation of the author's right to freedom of expression – with all the protections this right guarantees.

Get Adobe Acrobat Reader

You will need adobe acrobat to read most of the documents. Please download adobe acrobat reader. Get Adobe Acrobat For Your System
June 2020

%d bloggers like this: