This is about empowering Indians…
Here are two circulars issued by the Kerala police detailing the the ranks of police officers qualified to investigate 498A cases and categorizing 498A as a grave offence. Both circulars were uncovered by the volunteers of SIF Kerala with Protect India Family Foundation assisting.
More such revelations to come:
_________________________________________________
The credit for this info goes to the original poster/researcher, a great guy and a true 498A warrior.
A Few Notes On Crpc 125
1. The code has dangerous implications – any wife (that includes divorced women) may file a petition for maintenance under CrPC 125. In the event that she doesn’t marry anyone, you are liable for her maintenance for the remainder of her life. You are liable no matter what, whether you pay or you don’t that’s your choice. If you don’t pay maintenance, the Order can go to execution resulting in a warrant against you and potentially Passport cancellation (Passport Act, 1967) – I repeat, passport cancellation – that DOES NOT mean you will be extradited – but it’s a concern nevertheless.
2. Divorced wife means – whether she lives in adultery doesnt affect her rights to maintenance – ONLY if she is capable of earning on her own (has a job) OR gets married – then you are off the hook. Or, you may get US or Canadian citizenship in which case the Indian law doesn’t affect you unless you land in India. Unpaid maintenance resulting in a warrant still remains valid within Indian jurisdiction.
3. Most importantly, US divorce – contested, uncontested, ex-parte, mutual consent, whatever… don’t matter in the case of CrPC 125……the Magistrate at the lower court, may upon his/her discretion, ignore the US court’s verdict. His call on “change of circumstances” is final… if the girl had a job in the US (legal or illegal) and she returns to India just for fun… that’s a change in fiscal circumstance and she may be entitled for maintenance u/s CrPC 125.
Even if you pay/settle in the U.S. or India – she may still claim and get more maintenance, if she has reasons – such as a medical need or any other life events that have changed her fiscal condition (she has blown all the money you had paid in permanent maintenance) .
No matter how fool proof your marital termination agreement here is, she can claim and get maintenance u/s CrPC 125. Monetary sanctions against a wife levied in the US has no impact in India as Indian law and judgments will be based on Indian public policy and socio-economic context.
4. The only silver lining is – if you can smoke her out in the U.S. to participate in a contested divorce, at least the divorce is valid in India.
5. Finally, marital misconduct in the U.S. such as restraining orders on wife’s or arrests of abusive wives may have some feeble impact, if any, on the “FINAL” maintenance order. As far as the interim “maintenance pendente lite” – court awards temporary maintenance based on prima facie assumption of truth on the girl’s petition and cursory review of preliminary facts.
Bad news huh? Well, I learned it/learning it the hard way.
This doesn’t mean however, that we shouldn’t fight – if your case has merits (or so you think) – keep fighting… the ONLY two prongs we have –
1. Lengthier procedure may frustrate the girl’s party
2. She may get married…Hope and pray that she gets married
In this gloom and doom, some rays of hope:
Amal Mukherjee
versus
Pranati Mukherjee & Anr.
C.R.R. NO. 399 of 2007
In the case of Md. Jahangir Khan Vs. Mst. Manoara Bibi, reported in 1992 Cri L.J. 83, a Division Bench of our High Court held that the future salary not being a tangible corporeal property the same cannot be attached for recovery of the arrear maintenance.
________________________________________________
This is yet another circular uncovered by PIFF.
In this circular, the police pretty much come up with their own rules, in defiance of the directives of the Supreme Court on the arrest of women.
Here is the circular: Mumbai Police Circular On Arresting Women – 2004
Here is the other set of directives/circulars uncovered by PIFF through RTIs:
_______________________________________________________________________________
The last order in issued by former CJI, Justice MN VENKATACHALLIAH, in joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP directed the DGPs of all states to issue the necessary orders for compliance.
The Protect India Family Foundation filed a bunch of RTIs and were able to get the Maharashtra Govt to produce the orders issued by the then DGP and Dpty Home Secy (Home) to comply with the orders issued by the most hon’ble former CJI.
Here they are:
This is yet another circular uncovered by PIFF.
In this circular, the police pretty much come up with their own rules, in defiance of the directives of the Supreme Court on the arrest of women. Using the justification outlined in this circular, corrupt cops can categorize grandmothers, mothers and innocent sibling as “unscrupulous females” and arrest them. Justice AN Mulla* was so right about the nature of the Indian police force !
Here is the circular: Mumbai Police Circular On Arresting Women – 2004
Inspite of these orders, the Maharashtra police have been arresting innocents and subjecting them to threats, intimidation, illegal detention and extortion in 498A cases.
They are prima facie guilty of contempt of court.
*Justice A N Mulla had once commented, ” I say it with all sense of responsibility that there is not a single lawless group in the whole country whose record of crime is anywhere near the record of that organized unit which is known as the Indian Police Force.”
_________________________________________________________________________________
This year has been significant for those of us fighting to end this extortion racket known as IPC 498A.
The four most significant events that have occurred this year and that will lead to the eventual end of 498A are the following:
The fourth of these events are orders issued by Justice Regupathi of the Chennai HC. You can read about the news coverage from the Indian Express:
Women Police Resorting To 3rd Degree Restrained By HC
To understand one of the reasons why these orders were issued, we need to look no further than at this news clipping of this sack of shit, caught accepting a bribe:
I don’t have his original orders from July/2008, but I got my hands on the acknowledgment filed by the DGP’s office, Chennai, from a SIF volunteer. The gist of the orders were the following as per news reports:
The Honorable High Court has issued the following observation in M.P. No.1/2008 in Criminal Original Petition No.10896/2008 filed by Tr.Romaiah.
i) Except in cases of Dowry Death/suicide and offences of serious nature, the Station House Officers of the All Women Police Stations are to register F.I.R. only on approval of the Dowry Prohibition Officer concerned.
ii) Social workers/mediators with experience may be nominated and housed in the same premises of All Women Police Stations along with Dowry Prohibition Officers.
iii) Arrest in matrimonial disputes, in particular arrest of aged, infirm, sick persons and minors, shall not be made by the Station House Officers of the All Women Police Stations.
iv) If arrest is necessary during investigation, sanction must be obtained from the Superintendent of Police concerned by forwarding the reasons recorded in writing.
v) Arrest can be made after filing of the final report before the Magistrate concerned if there is non-cooperation and abscondance of accused persons, and after receipt of appropriate order (Non-Bailable Warrant).
vi) Charge sheet must be filed within a period of 30 days from the date of registration of the F.I.R. and in case of failure, extension of time shall be sought for from the jurisdiction Magistrate indicating the reasons for the failure.
vii) No weapon including Lathis/physical force be used while handling cases at the All Women Police Stations.
viii) Complainants/victims should be provided with adequate security/accommodation at Government Home and interest of the children must be taken care of.
ix) Sridana properties/movables and immovable to be restored at the earliest to the victims/complainants and legal aid may be arranged for them through Legal Services Authority for immediate redressal of their grievances.
Here are some excerpts from the acknowledgment of the above orders of Justice Regupathi that will go a long way in ending the extortion racket called 498A in Chennai/TN:
Here is the acknowledgment of the police compliance of Justice Regupathi’s earlier orders:
Justice Regupathi 498A Orders Compliance Aknowledgement-2008
__________________________________________________________________________
Here are a few citations that will allow you to win DV Act cases.
Before you get into that, read the FAQ compiled by the mother of the flawed DV Act, Indira Jaising and her crooked cohorts of the Lawyers Collective:
The DV Act is touted as a civil law and a “second chance” by the likes of Indira Jaising. But the fine print says that the proceedings are to be conducted as in criminal cases.
In effect, like all the other things touted by these Feminazis, this is a pernicious law designed to bypass the higher requirements of proof needed for criminal cases like 498A. It is designed to be a wolf in a sheep’s clothing. If you don’t adhere to the orders of a magistrate who is required to pass protection orders for immediate relief, this civil case turns into a criminal case for contempt and then you are really screwed. What makes this law so pernicious is that unlike 498A, which hinges on the sheer terror unleashed by corrupt Indian Police officers to cow the victims, this case can deprive you of the sanctuary offered by your home and can have the entire family tossed out on the street.
I will compile all the judgment related to the DV act here. If anyone has new judgments, please leave a comment or paste the judgment below in the comments section.
Please start by reading this judgment of Justice Dhingra given below. He interprets Batra Vs Batra and also explains the meaning and rights of shared household and matrimonial home:
Justice Dhingra Explains The Meaning Of Shared Household
If you face the false and fabricated Domestic Violence act, you must know the following:
Crl.P 3714 of 2007 delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh where in it was held
“It is a fundamental principle of law that any penal provision has no retrospective operation but only prospective. There is no allegation either in the report or in the statement or in the complaint on the 1st Respondent with regards to the acts of domestic violence that took place on or after 26-10-2006.Therefore continuation of proceedings against the petitioners is nothing but abuse of process of court”.
I finally got my hands on this judgment thanks to Aejaz_legal, a reader who posted this judgment:
To understand this principle, read this article:
Delhi Court: DV Act Has No Retrospective Effect – Ashma Vs Afsar – CC No.311/8- Oct 2008
Here is the judgment:
Here is another judgment from the Chennai HC stating the same:
Here is the Kapil Rastogi Judgment – Jan/2009, stating the same:
Kapil Rastogi Vs Urvashi: DV Case – 2009
Here is the judgment: SC judgment, Batra Vs Batra, 2007.
PMO Official Accused Of Domestic Violence By Wife
Here is the judgment (Hindi): Suraj Prakash Vs Sushil DV Act – 2007
Here is the very interesting judgment: Swarup Sarkar DV Act Judgment 2007
Here is the judgment: Sonia Vs Vinod: Domestic Violence Case
Also, check out Vinayaks blog, link is given below. He has some tips to fight the DV Act:
________________________________________
Here are the orders of Justice Gambhir. You can read about him here and I very well consider him to be the next Justice Dhingra.
These guidelines follow the Commissioner YS Dadwal order prohibiting 498A arrests in Delhi.
Delhi Police: No 498A Arrests Without DCP’s Permission
There won’t be hordes of radical feminists attacking Justice Gambhir for these guidelines, as they risk being exposed and ridiculed by Indian bloggers affected by 498A.
More later. I’ve been working many hours in my new job and I have been sick since yesterday. Trying to wrap up as many pending posts as possible.
Here is the judgment: Justice Kailash Gambhir (Delhi HC) Guidelines On 498A Cases
The guidelines are given below:
Guidelines:
1. Social workers/NGO
There is no iota of doubt that most of the complaints are filed in the heat of the moment over trifling fights and ego clashes. It is also a matter of common knowledge that in their tussle and ongoing hostility the hapless children are the worst victims. Before a wife moves to file a complaint with the Women Cell, a lot of persuasion and conciliation is required.
(a) The Delhi Legal Service Authority, National Commission for Women, NGOs and social workers working for upliftment of women should set up a desk in crime against women cell to provide them with conciliation services, so that before the State machinery is set in motion, the matter is amicably settled at that very stage. But, if ultimately even after efforts put by the social workers reconciliation seems not possible then the matter should be undertaken by the police officials of Crime against Women cell and there also, serious efforts should be made to settle the matter amicably.
2. Police Authorities:
(a) Pursuant to directions given by the Apex Court, the Commissioner of Police, Delhi vide Standing Order No. 330/2007 had already issued guidelines for arrest in the dowry cases registered under Sections 498-A/406 IPC and the said guidelines should be followed by the Delhi Police strictly and scrupulously.
(i) No case under Section 498-A/406 IPC should be registered without the prior approval of DCP/Addl. DCP.
(ii) Arrest of main accused should be made only after thorough investigation has been conducted and with the prior approval of the ACP/DCP.
(iii) Arrest of the collateral accused such as father-in-law, mother- in-law, brother-in-law or sister-in-law etc should only be made after prior approval of DCP on file.
(b) Police should also depute a well trained and a well behaved staff in all the crime against women cells especially the lady officers, all well equipped with the abilities of perseverance, persuasion, patience and forbearance.
(c) FIR in such cases should not be registered in a routine manner.
(d) The endeavor of the Police should be to scrutinize complaints very carefully and then register FIR.
(e) The FIR should be registered only against those persons against whom there are strong allegations of causing any kind of physical or mental cruelty as well as breach of trust.
(f) All possible efforts should be made, before recommending registration of any FIR, for reconciliation and in case it is found that there is no possibility of settlement, then necessary steps in the first instance be taken to ensure return of stridhan and dowry articles etc. by the accused party to the complainant.
3. Lawyers:
Lawyers also have a great responsibility in this regard.
(a) While drafting pleadings/complaints, the lawyers should not unnecessarily suggest incorporation of wild allegations, or in character assassination of any of the parties or their family members whatever the case may be.
(b) Lawyers are also to endeavor to bring about amicable settlement between the parties as they are expected to discharge sacred duty as social engineers in such cases instead of making them target for monetary considerations by multiplying their cases.
4. Courts:
Subordinate courts, be it trying civil or criminal cases concerning bail, maintenance, custody, divorce or other related matters shall in the first instance, in every case where it is possible so to do consistently with the nature and circumstances of the case, to make every endeavour to bring about reconciliation between the parties.
a) The first endeavor should be for possible reunion and restitution of the parties and as a last endeavor to bring about peaceful separation.
b) If possible extra time should be devoted to such matters to restore peace in the lives of rival parties be it by re-uniting them or even in case of their parting ways.
c) Conciliatory proceedings by the court should preferably be held in camera to avoid embarrassment.
d) Wherever, the courts are overburdened with the work, necessary assistance of Mediation and Conciliation cells should be sought.
Apart from above directions it would not be out of place to ask parties also to themselves adopt a conciliatory approach without intervention of any outside agency and unless there are very compelling reasons, steps for launching prosecution against any spouse or his/her in-laws be not initiated just in a huff, anger, desperation or frustration.
________________________________________________________________
The SC had declared that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right. You can read about that here:
In this judgment from 2008, they brought lengthy police investigations under the purview of this right. This judgment assumes significance in 498A cases, including mine.
The gist of this judgment is that:
“It is, therefore, well settled that the right to speedy trial in all criminal persecutions is an inalienable right under Article 21 of the Constitution. This right is applicable not only to the actual proceedings in court but also includes within its sweep the preceding police investigations as well. The right to speedy trial extends equally to all criminal persecutions and is not confined to any particular category of cases. In every case, where the right to speedy trial is alleged to have been infringed, the court has to perform the balancing act upon taking into consideration all the attendant circumstances, enumerated above, and determine in each case whether the right to speedy trial has been denied in a given case. Where the court comes to the conclusion that the right to speedy trial of an accused has been infringed, the charges or the conviction, as the case may be, may be quashed unless the court feels that having regard to the nature of offence and other relevant circumstances, quashing of proceedings may not be in the interest of justice. In such a situation, it is open to the court to make an appropriate order as it may deem just and equitable including fixation of time for conclusion of trial.”
Here is the judgment: SC: Right To Speedy Trials Includes Lengthy Police Investigations-2008
Click the link below for a judgment in a case that dragged on for 8 years until everyone involved became exhausted, compromised and wrapped it up. Here is the link: Subu Vs Jayanthi
Here is an excerpt of the news coverage:
Dhananjay Mahapatra | TNN
New Delhi: In a significant enlargement of the scope of ‘right to speedy trial’, the Supreme Court has ruled that it applied not only to snail-paced trial court proceedings but also to lengthy police probes. This means if the police drag on an investigation without producing prima facie evidence, the accused would now have the right to move court for quashing the FIR. “It is well settled that the right to speedy trial in all criminal prosecutions is an inalienable right under Article 21 (right to life) of the Constitution. This right is applicable not only to the actual proceedings in court but also includes within its sweep the preceding police investigation as well,” a bench of Justices C K Thakker and D K Jain said in a recent judgment. This ruling would be applicable to cases pending before the police, CBI, DRI, income-tax and customs authorities as the court clarified that the right to speedy trial, now equally applicable to trial court proceedings as well as police investigations, extended to “all criminal persecutions and is not confined to any particular category of cases”. This clarification assumes significance as the higher courts have always treated lightly the complaints of harassment from those accused of petty offences while giving attention only to prominent cases or those involving heinous crimes.
Justice Jain, writing the judgment for the bench, said: “In every case, where the right to speedy trial is alleged to have been infringed, the court has to perform the balancing act upon taking into consideration all the attendant circumstances and determine in each case whether the right to speedy trial has been denied in a given case.” And if the accused is able to prove that his right to speedy trial had been a casualty in the lengthy trial or long pending investigation, the higher courts could quash the case and even the conviction recorded by the lower courts, the bench said.
But, the ruling came with a rider saying that even if there was inordinate delay in the trial or police probe, the case might not be quashed if the court came to the conclusion that doing so would not be in public interest.
_____________________________________________
Stating that officials in India understood only the “crack of a whip”, the apex court on Friday ordered that a policeman turning away a person without registering his complaint could face contempt of court charges and cool his heels in jail if he failed to justify non-registration of the FIR.
Here are the orders issued in the Lalita Kumari case. The scum, refused to help this lady whose daughter was missing. If this had been a 498A, they would have fallen over themselves to capture grandmothers sitting at home. The SC has provided the proper medicine.
The SC link is here, but I expect it to die soon.
You can find the orders here:
1. SC to DGPs and Chiefs Secys: SC Order To DGPs And State Chied Secys
2. Jail time for cops for not registering complaints: SC Order In Lalita Kumari Case-2008
As written before, the police are required to register and investigate a cognizable complaint.
I hope to see a few goons and criminals dressed in a police uniform, jailed under this order.
________________________________________________________________
RSS Feed: IPC 498A
Propublica: Publc Interest Journalism
IPC 498A 
Recent Comments