Delhi Police Instructions On Registering Dowry Cases

This is sourced from the SIF repository.

This circular stems from the Smt Neera Singh Judgment of Justice Dhingra.

Here is the pdf of the circular: Delhi Police Instructions On Registering Dowry Cases

Here is the text:

CIRCULAR No. 7/2007
The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while dealing with Criminal Misc. Nos. 7108 and 7262 of 2006 under Section 482 CrP.C., has laid down guidelines to be followed for investigation and trial of cases under section 498/A IPC, dowry, cases etc. The main -guidelines to be followed are as follows :-
1. Where allegations, are made that dowry has been given as a consideration for marriage, the list in terms of Rule 2 of the Dowry Prohibition (Maintenance of lists of Presents to the Bride and Bridegroom) Rules, 1985 must be insisted upon by the Investigating Officer.
2. Where there is expenditure of a huge amount of money without disclosing the source of income, police should insist upon compliance of Rule 2 of Dowry Prohibition (Maintenance of lists of Presents to the Bride and Bridegroom) Rules, 1985 (photocopy enclosed) and should not entertain any complaint if the rules have not been complied with.
3. In case a grown up and well educated women gets married to a person despite a demand for dowry, she and her family members also become accomplices under section 3 of the Dowry Prohitiion Act, 1961. Appropriate action should be taken against them.
4. If the compliant is against every member of the family of husband, the allegations cannot be taken at their face value and need to be scrutinized carefully.
All the investigating Officers and supervising officers must ensure strict compliance of the above mentioned instructions.

________________________________

Justice Dhingra’s Judgment Clarifying CrPC 125

CrPC 125 is meant to serve as a tool to prevent destitution. Highly qualified Indian women harass their husbands by filing these cases to park themselves on their butts and collect tax free pay checks.

Justice Dhingra has turned his attention to putting an end to this malaise of laziness. This judgment embodies everything that can be done to end the abuse of CrPC 125.

Here is the text of this short and sharp judgment:

The petitioner who is an MBBS qualified Doctor and admittedly had been in practice before, claims that she was sitting at home despite being a qualified Doctor and does not work. The petitioner claimed maintenance against her husband who is in service. The Trial Court granted maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month. This petition is made against observation of the Trial Court that she was working somewhere and earning around Rs.8,000 to 10,000/- PM and that the maintenance granted by the Trial Court was made subject to adjustment of the maintenance being received by her under Section 125. Since counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner is not working anywhere, despite being a qualified Doctor, I consider that as she is receiving maintenance from husband, the Court should not allow her experience and qualification to go waste. I consider that she should be directed to work as a honorary Doctor in some public welfare institute or school free of charges where she can take care of health of the poor people. Let her come to Court and give an undertaking that she was prepared to work without charging anything in any institution named by this Court around her house minimum 5 hours a day and 6 days a week, so long she receives maintenance from her husband on the plea of being unemployed.

Here is the judgment: Justice Dhingra’s Landmark Judgment On Purpose Of CrPC 125

PS:

Thanks to the visitor who posted this judgment on my blog as a comment.

____________________________________________________________

Justice Dhingra Fines A Woman For Alienating The Son From The Father

Here are the excerpts from this case:

4.  The notice of the petition was served upon the wife who appeared along with her counsel and also brought the child to the Court. She stated that she could not comply with the order as the child was unwilling to meet his father. The child in this case is about five and a half years old and is student of Class-I. While her mother was addressing the Court the child started weeping loudly and cried that he does not want to meet his father and he continuously cried for some time. It looked as if weeping button has been switched on. Thereafter, this Court enquired from the child why he was unwilling to meet the father. The child told that his father used to beat him and his mother, during meetings. He could not give a single instance of beating either of him or his mother. It is not the case of respondent also that the petitioner used to beat them at the time of meeting under visitation rights. The enquiry made from the child showed that the mind of child was highly poisoned against the petitioner by the respondent and he was tutored to a great extent. It is amply clear that the respondent who was not agreeable to the visitation rights, had seen to it that the child himself created such a scene in the Court that the Court was convinced that child was unwilling to meet the father. The child is of tender years age. The manner in which the mind of the child has been poisoned against the father shows that the respondent was out to frustrate the order of the Court.
5.  It is apparent that there is a clear and willful design of defiance of the order of this Court by the respondent who used the child as a tool of her design by poisoning the mind of the child to such an extent that the child started crying on just seeing the father without any provocation in the Court itself.
6.  Although, it is a clear case of contempt committed by the wife but I consider that it would not be appropriate to sent the wife to the jail since that would cause further trauma of the child and it would be appropriate if a fine of Rs.25,000/- is imposed on the wife for defying the order of the Court. A fine of Rs.25,000/- is imposed on the respondent. In case of default of depositing the fine she shall suffer a simple imprisonment for a period of two weeks.

Here is the judgment: Mr.Aman Oberoi Versus Ms. Tina Oberoi

_______________________________________

Justice Dhingra Explains The Guidelines Used To Determine Child Custody

Here is what Justice Dhingra says while determining an interim child custody case:

“The principles of law in relation to the custody of a minor child are well settled. It is trite that while determining the question as to which parent the care and control of a child should be committed, the first and the paramount consideration is the welfare and interest of the child and not the rights of the parents under a statute. Indubitably the provisions of law pertaining to the custody of child contained in either the Guardians and Wards Act, 1980 (Section 17) or the Hindu Minority and guardianship Act, 1956 (Section 13) also hold out the welfare of the child are predominant consideration. In fact, no statute on the subject, can ignore, eschew or obliterate the vital factor of the welfare of the minor. The question of welfare of the minor child has again to be considered in the background of the relevant facts and circumstances. Each case has to be decided on its own facts and other decided cases can hardly serve as binding precedents insofar as the factual aspects of the case are concerned. It is, no doubt, true that father is presumed by the statutes to be better suited to look after the welfare of the child, being normally the working member and   head of the family, yet in each case the Court has to see primarily to the welfare of the child in determining the question of his or her custody. Better financial resources of either of the parents or their love for the child may be one of the relevant considerations but cannot be the sold determining factor for the custody of the child. It is here that a heavy duty is cast on the Court to exercise its judicial discretion judiciously in the background of all the relevant facts and circumstances, bearing in mind the welfare of the child as the paramount consideration.”

Here is the judgment: J Dhingra: CM(M) No. 752/2000 Ram Murti Chopra and Anr. v. Nagesh Tyagi

More information can be had from here:

INTERPARENTAL CHILD CUSTODY DISPUTES – THE INDIAN EXPERIENCE

___________________________________________________

Justice Dhingra Rules That Attorney Can Represent Client In Mutual Divorce Cases

Justice Dhingra had to say the following:

“Where the parties are living far away from the jurisdiction of the Court competent to dissolve the marriage, the parties after filing their affidavits can appoint attorneys to act on their behalf. Attorney is competent to act on behalf of the principal on the basis of power of attorney executed by the principal. The Courts have been allowing attorneys to file the petition, to withdraw the petition, to carry on proceedings in the Court on behalf of their principal in all other cases. The attorney can also act in matrimonial cases as per instructions of their principle. The Court can take necessary precautions to prevent frauds being perpetuated on it but unless the Court smells some kind of fraud being played with it, the Court should normally recognize the act of the attorneys.”

Here is the judgment: Justice Dhingra Rules That Attorney Can Represent Client In Mutual Divorce Cases

_______________________________________________________________

Justice Dhingra Explains The Meaning Of Shared Household

This great Indian judge has yet again delivered us from evil.

He defines a shared household as the following:

“Once a person gains majority, he becomes independent and parents have no liability to maintain him. It is different thing that out of love and affection, the parents may continue to support him even when he becomes financially independent or continue to help him even after his marriage. This help and support of parents to the son is available only out of their love and affection and out of mutual trust and understanding. There is no legal liability on the parents to continue to support a dis-obedient son or a son which becomes liability on them or a son who dis-respects or dis-regards them or becomes a source of nuisance for them or trouble for them. The parents can always forsake such a son and daughter-in-law and tell them to leave their house and lead their own life and let them live in peace. It is because of love, affection, mutual trust, respect and support that members of a joint family gain from each other that the parents keep supporting their sons and families of sons. In turn, the parents get equal support, love, affection and care. Where this mutual relationship of love, care, trust and support goes, the parents cannot be forced to keep a son or daughter in law with them nor there is any statutory provision which compels parents to suffer because of the acts of residence and his son or daughter in law.”

He defines a matrimonial home in the following manner:

“However, matrimonial home was not just a building made of bricks and walls. It was a home/place comprising of sweetness of relations of family members and elders, full of blessing. In the matrimonial home, matrimonial rights and obligations are to be equally observed. Practically speaking, the residence of husband should be the home of the wife where both the spouses have equal right to reside.”

Here is the judgement, a boon to those facing the ugly reality of the clumsily drafted domestic violence act:

J Dhingra: Neetu Mittal Vs Kanta Mittal DVA 2007

____________________________________________________________

Justice Dhingra Explains Section 24 Of The HMA – 2008

Justice Dhingra explains Section 24 of the HMA in a judgment. Section 24/HMA reads as follows:

“24. Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings.- Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the Court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner’s own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the Court to be reasonable””

Here is the excerpt:

5. From the perusal of Section 24, it is abundantly clear that the object and intent of this Section is to enable the husband or the wife, as the case may be, who has no independent source of income for his or her support and necessary expense of proceedings under the Act to obtain maintenance expenses pendent lite so that the proceedings may be continued without any hardships on his or her part. The benefits granted under this Section are only temporary in nature and there are other provisions of law where a wife, who is not able to maintain herself, can claim maintenance/permanent alimony from the husband e.g. Section 25 of HMA or under provisions of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. The provisions of this Section are not meant for equivalising the income of wife with that of husband but are meant to see that where divorce or other proceedings are filed, either of the party should not suffer because of paucity of source of income and the Court should pass an order even during the pendency of such a petition, for maintenance and litigation expenses. Where a wife has no income or is without any support for maintaining herself, the Court has to pass an order considering the income and living status of the husband. However, where the wife and her husband both are earning and both are having good salary, merely because there is some salary difference, an order is not required to be passed under Section 24 of HMA.

Here is this all important judgment: Justice Dhingra Explains Section 24 Of The HMA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Reserve: August 18, 2008
Date of Order: September 18,2008
CM(M) 949/2008
18.09.2008
Manish Kumar …Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rakesh Tiku with Mr. Abhinav Bajaj, Advocate
Versus
Mrs. Pratibha…Respondent
Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sindhwani and Ms. Ekta Kalra, Advocates
JUSTICE SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?Yes.
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes.
3. Whether judgment should be reported in Digest? Yes.
JUDGMENT:
1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed an order 25th July 2008 passed by learned trial court whereby the learned ADJ awarded a maintenance of Rs.7,500/- per month to the respondent wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA).
2. There is no dispute about the fact that both husband and wife were gainfully employed. Wife claimed that her monthly salary was Rs.28,500 whereas her husband was having monthly salary of Rs.90,000/- per month. She claimed a maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month.
3. Both husband and wife were working in private companies and their salary statements and other record was placed before the trial court. The trial court found that the take-home salary of wife was Rs.41,900/- and that of the husband was Rs.75,761/- per month respectively. Finding that the salary of the husband was more than the salary of the wife, the trial court granted maintenance of Rs.7,500/- to the wife.
4. I consider that while awarding maintenance to the wife, the trial court has lost sight of the basic ingredients of Section 24. Section 24 of HMA reads as follows:
“24. Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings.- Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the Court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner’s own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the Court to be reasonable”
5. From the perusal of Section 24, it is abundantly clear that the object and intent of this Section is to enable the husband or the wife, as the case may be, who has no independent source of income for his or her support and necessary expense of proceedings under the
Act to obtain maintenance expenses pendent lite so that the proceedings may be continued without any hardships on his or her part. The benefits granted under this Section are only temporary in nature and there are other provisions of law where a wife, who is not able to maintain herself, can claim maintenance/permanent alimony from the husband e.g. Section 25 of HMA or under provisions of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. The provisions of this Section are not meant for equivalising the income of wife with that of husband but are meant to see that where divorce or other proceedings are filed, either of the party should not suffer because of paucity of source of income and the Court should pass an order even during the pendency of such a petition, for maintenance and litigation expenses. Where a wife has no income or is without any support for maintaining herself, the Court has to pass an order considering the income and living status of the husband. However, where the wife and her husband both are earning and both are having good salary, merely because there is some salary difference, an order is not required to be passed under Section 24 of HMA.
6. In the instant case, it is nowhere pleaded by the wife in her application under Section 24 that the income being earned by her was not sufficient for her maintenance. Her contention in the application was that the petitioner was liable to bring her to the same status and station as if she was living with him in the matrimonial home. In my view, this is not the intent and purpose of Section 24. The purpose and intent of 24 is quite different as stated above.
7. The salary slips of the wife has been placed on record which show that she was having salary in the range of around Rs.50,000/- per month. Her statement of salary account from February 2007 to January 2008 shows that she had a take-home salary during this year of Rs.6,80,188/-. The average monthly salary was thus Rs.56,682/-. This salary was after deduction of tax, employees provident fund, PF contribution etc. Her gross salary inclusive of tax, provident fund etc was around Rs.80,000/- per month. A person who is earning this much of salary can very well maintain herself with such a standard which may be envy of many and under no stretch of imagination it can be said that the income earned by her was not enough to maintain her. There was no other liability on her. There is no offspring from this wedlock.
8. In view of my foregoing discussion, I consider that the trial court has wrongly allowed maintenance to the respondent wife. The petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 25th July 2008, granting maintenance of Rs.7500/- per month to the wife, is hereby set aside. However, the petitioner would be liable to pay the litigation expenses, as ordered by the trial court. No order as to costs.
September 18, 2008
SHIV NARAYAN DHINGRA J.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Justice Dhingra Quashed An HMA Case-2008

The Noble Justice Dhingra in action again. This time delivers justice in a HMA case, Parnab Kumar Chakarborthy Vs Ruma Chakarborthy-2008

Here is what he had to say:

• 3. The petitioner in his petition has stated that the learned Court has taken into account his gross salary while his net salary after deduction was hardly Rs.5,000/-. He had to maintain two houses. He was working in Bhiwadi in Rajasthan as Shift In charge, his daughter from the earlier deceased wife was living at his ancestral house at Rai Barelli with his ailing mother. Thus, he had to maintain two units; one at Rai Barelli and other at Rajasthan. He also pleaded that the learned ADJ had not taken into account the fact that the wife was a professional beautician, who had done diploma in beauty-culture and hair dressing and in the bio data supplied to him at the time of marriage, it was stated that she was a freelance beautician doing the work of beautician. He further stated that the account of expenditure given by the wife would show that she was living in luxury, which was not possible out of the meager income of her father, who was a retired Naval Officer and since she was qualified and was spending a lot so, there was a presumption that she was earning and she had not come to the Court with clean hands.

Here is the judgment:

Justice Dhingra Quashed An HMA Case-2008

_____________________________________________________________________

Justice Dhingra Kicks Some Sense Into The MM Of Patiala House

Justice Dhingra, well on his way to the pantheon of great Indian judges, recently received an application to take cognizance of criminal contempt of court against  some respondents in a 498a case from the excuse of a Metropolitan Magistrate of Patiala House.

Read what he had to say about this scumbag Magistrate:

• The learned MM seems to have spent a lot of time in framing this reference petition which runs into 37 pages and annexures to the reference run into another more than 100 pages. After perusal of the entire reference I find the reference is not worth the paper wasted by the learned MM on it. I find no imputation had been made against the learned MMs Court but of bias which was inferred from the orders passed by him. It is surprising that the learned MM should have sent this reference of contempt only on the allegations of bias made against him. However, on perusal of this reference, I feel that the  learned MM definitely seems to be biased in favour of the wife and against the husband and other in-laws. Otherwise, there was no reason for him to get provoked for sending this reference, so that the family members of the husband are called by this Court in criminal contempt, despite the fact that no person insinuation was made against him.
• I consider it is a right of every litigant, who is facing proceeding in a Court, that justice should not only be done but should also seem to be done and if a litigant feels that  what he was seeing was not justice but injustice, he has a right to move transfer application and if bias is inferred from the orders passed by the Court, the Court has no reason to send a reference for criminal contempt. This reference is rejected. There is no ground to summon the respondents. A copy of this order be sent to the District Judge, Delhi. A copy of this order be also sent to the Inspecting Judge of the learned MM and to Honble the Chief Justice.

It is precisely this kind of a  scumbag who denied my mom and sister bail after being bought by my ex-father In law.

Justice Dhingra has yet again shown us the way and added one more weapon to our arsenal to fight back against this extortion racket.

Here is the order from Justice Dhingra.

CourtOnItsOwnMotion-Vs-Sunil-Seth-2007

____________________________________________

The Rantings Of Indira Jaising

My previous post was on the writings of Madhu Kishwar.

I decided to post the rantings of Indira Jaising with a little touch of my own, to highlight the yawning chasm separating Indira Jaising and the unfortunately sidelined Madhu Purnima Kishwar.

Here we go:

• It Was A Crime That I Was Born A Woman: This is the vicious article she wrote smearing the noble Justice Dhingra, a classic tactic of any practioner of pussy politics. By the way, Justice Dhingra is on his way for inclusion in the pantheon of great Indian judges, for his seminal judgments that are leading to the end of the extortion racket known as IPC 498A in Delhi. And just to remind you folks,  he is the primary reason for the existence of this blog !!
• Of Crying Hoarse, Not Wolf!- Indira Jaising: This is the crap that resulted from Batra Vs Batra. The Supreme Court had said that the expression “shared household” was clumsily drafted. Of course it is. Only morons can draft something like this and yes, that is precisely what the Hon’ble judges said.
• Dangerous Bill-Domestic Violence Bill: This was published in Indiatogether, a famous place where fellow practitioners of pussy politics, such as the now disgraced Vikram Jeet Batra, air their myopic views. This article espouses the DV Bill as the panacea for the ills plaguing women. She lobbies in this article to deprive men of the right to self defense. Activists like myself didn’t know what all this was about, otherwise, the TWICE divorced Ms Jaising would have been moaning before the advent of the bill, not after.

News flash:

• Indira Jaising/Lawyers Collective paid $1,40,000 For “Staying Alive”, Report On DV Act

________________________________________________________

Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP – 1994

For reasons unknown, I decided to revisit, possibly, the most important judgment ever delivered by an Indian court.

These words of  Justice MN VENKATACHALLIAH renewed my determination to fight.

“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 can 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. The recommendations of the Police Commission merely reflect the constitutional concomitants of the fundamental right to personal liberty and freedom. A person is not liable to arrest merely on the suspicion of complicity in an offence. There must be some reasonable justification in the opinion of the officer effecting the arrest that such arrest is necessary and justified. Except in heinous offences, an arrest must be avoided if a police officer issues notice to person to attend the Station House and not to leave the Station without permission would do.“

Here is this seminal judgment again, reformatted and presented anew:

Original link to Judis: http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.asp?tfnm=11479

Given below is the 3rd report of the National Police Commission that this judgment draws on:

Third Report Of The National Police Commission (From BPRD)

Also given below is a fragment of the First Police Commission:

First Report Of The National Police Commission (Fragment From BPRD)

Compliance orders:

• Mumbai Police Compliance Orders With Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP

• Maha Dpty Home Secy Orders Complying With Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP -1994

____________________________________________________________

Justice Kailash Gambhir (Delhi HC) Guidelines On 498A Cases

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.

________________________________________________________________

Delhi HC Landmark Judgment On Paternity (DNA) Test – 2008

Folks,

finally got my hands on this landmark judgment. The Delhi HC allowed DNA tests to establish paternity. This is a landmark judgment for victims of paternity fraud in India.

Just imagine this situation. A devoted husband and father spends years of his life building a life for his wife and offspring and suddenly one day, he finds out that his wife had cheated on him years ago and what he perceived to be his own flesh and blood wasn’t after all, his own. And worse, his now exposed adulterous wife files a 498A against him. This happened to a very dear and now devastated friend of mine.

Justice Vipin Sanghi has done us all a great service.

Thanks to him, these bitches can face the consequences of their actions.

Should any bleeding heart feminazis like Girija Vyas or Indira Jaising object to my words, or raise a hue and cry about how the child was becoming the victim or the mother was the victim, I implore them to do more than that, by adopting these signs of infidelity and sin into their homes and raising them as their own and better still, marrying these adulterous women to their nephews or grand nephews and random relatives. Don’t actions speak louder than words?

Here is the judgment: Delhi HC – DNA Test-HMA-2008- Justice Vipin Sanghi

For those of you who find yourselves in a similar situation or luckily, are just facing a 498A, please read the judgment (M.Srinivasulu Vs State of A.P. (10/09/2007)) below.

The reason for introducing this judgment is this. Most 498A complaints aren’t worth the paper they are written on. This judgment clearly establishes that the consequences of cruelty need to be proven, before a complaint can be brought under the purview of 498A. Click on the quote to download it:

“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.”

This judgment, coupled with Joginder Kumar Vs State of UP will go a long way in beating off the 498A. I promise you that !!!

I dedicate this post to my friend. Hopefully he’ll be able to climb out of the hole he’s been pushed into and overcome the ordeal he’s been subjected to…

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Delhi Police Commissioner: No 498A Arrests W/O Permission Of DCP

Folks,

if you remember, YS (Yudhbir Singh) Dadwal was appointed as the commissioner of Police, Delhi, amid a controversy.

Here is a photograph of former Delhi Police Commissioner, YS Dadwal:

I wondered who YS Dadwal was, but had stated that this establishment needs capable officers in key posts in order to continue their ventures without the distractions of issues with Law and Order etc. I was right about this and what came as a pleasant surprise to me is that, after the assumption of office, Commissioner Dadwal publicly stated that he wouldn’t allow the police to be used as instruments of revenge, especially in 498A cases.

This enlightened officer has followed up on his words with actions and has issued standing orders to the effect that no one is to be arrested in 498A cases without the permission of the DCP.

Here is the order in pdf format:

Delhi Police Comm YS Dadwal: No 498A Arrests Without Approval Of DCP (pdf)

______________________________

Here is another order from the Delhi police enforcing Justice Dhingra’s Smt Neera Singh Judgment:

• Delhi Police Circular Enforcing Delhi HC Instructions Regarding Dowry (498A) cases
• For Reference: Justice Dhingra’s Smt Neera Singh Judgment

What is the impact of Commissioner Dadwal’s order ? In Delhi, this order:

• Eliminates the need for Anticipatory bail
• Ensures the 498A can no longer be used to jail entire families and extort money.
• Eliminates the police as a factor in this extortion racket.
• Takes away the power to arrest from the morons who infest the Indian criminal justice system. These morons range from the goons in uniform to corrupt lower court magistrates.
• The lawyers will see a huge source of revenue dry up in the form of the elimination for the need for Anticipatory bail and defense in 498A cases.
• The Delhi courts will see a drop in the number of cases getting into the filthy sewer known as the Indian Criminal Justice System.
• The number of final reports filed in Delhi will go up. Read this to know what a final report is: The 498A Final Report Of Film Actor Prashanth
• Commissioner Dadwal can now focus the energies of the Delhi police force on real issues, such as rapes, traficking of women, terrorist attacks and real crimes, instead of allowing goons in uniform to capture middle aged women and grandmothers in their home in the early morning or the start of the weekend, all in the name of “protecting women”.

This order is in line with the order issued by the AP Police Commissioner, MV Krishna Rao, in 2002. You can read about that order here:

Hyderabad Police: No Arrest In 498A Cases Without Permission Of DCP – 2002

All these orders are based on the Supreme Court Judgment of Joginder Kumar Vs State of UP. You can read about the importance and the rationale behind this judgment here:

Habeas Corpus, Magna Carta And Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP

That brings me back to Justice Shiv Narain Dhingra, who undoubtedly ranks amongst the greatest judges of India. He wrote (Crl. Appeal No. 696/2004, 01.Nov.2007):

“In all these cases in the name of investigation, except recording statement of complainant and her few relatives nothing is done by police. The police do not verify any circumstantial evidence nor collect any other evidence about the claims made by the complainant. No evidence about giving of dowry or resources of the complainant’s family claiming spending of huge amounts is collected by the police. This all is resulting into gross misuse of the provisions of law.”

You can download this judgment from here:

Justice Dhingra (Crl. Appeal No. 696/2004, 01.Nov.2007)

It is this excerpt that Commissioner Dadwal quotes in his order.

Personally, I feel a sense of satisfaction as I had quoted the same excerpt in the last chapter of The Guide To Surviving IPC 498A.

This is it. For all you folks from Delhi, this signals the end of the extortion racket known as section 498A. For the rest of you in this country, use this to nail the cops who showed up/show up at your door to effect an illegal arrest. We have turned the corner in this fight against this extortion racket known as 498A and against the practitioners of pussy politics, aka, The Feminazis of India.

Update: Aug/16/08

This order has been reinforced:

The Justice Kailash Gambhir (Delhi HC) Guidelines On 498A Cases

Next steps:

• Use this to pressure other states to issue similar standing orders for the police to comply with the Joginder Kumar Vs UP judgment.
• Set a target date to eliminate 498A as an extortion racket and make it bailable and non-compoundable across the country.
• File compensation for illegal detention against police officers who violated the Joginder Kumar arrest guidelines. If 20 people per state do this, this will break the budgets of the states for law and order and cause the scum in uniform to think twice before entering our homes to terrorize our families to extort large sums of money under the pretext of women protection laws.
• Prepare to force an amendment to the DV Act to sanitize it and make it gender neural and implementable. This will be the next evil to overcome and give Indira Jaising more reasons to moan about 🙂.

____________________________________

The 498A Final Report Of Filmstar Prashanth

Prashant 498a Final Report (pdf)

I wrote the 498A Survivor’s Guide as a means to help people defend themselves when caught up in this extortion racket known as Section 498A, IPC. Months after writing it, I was plagued by doubts about whether it was fulfilling its purpose.

In July of 2007 I heard about a 498A case being filed against film actor Prashanth and his family. I read that they had asked the media to spread the word about the survivor’s guide to 498a as it had inspired them to fight. The feedback I received from Prashanth’s case that led me to push on with my efforts.

A few weeks ago, I heard that a final report was submitted and Prashant’s 498A case closed by the Chennai Police as a case of “MISTAKE OF FACT”.

In effect, the Police force has demonstrated that they can investigation.

When a 498A case is registered, there is a rush by the police to shakedown the victims under the pretext of a compromise. If the victims can’t or won’t pay up, the FIR with its litany of lies is transformed into a chargesheet verbatim and filed in unregulated, overburdened and increasingly corrupt trial courts. I have heard of very few instances when the allegations in the FIR were investigated and a final report being filed — closing the case as one without merit. Click here for the flowchart that will give you an idea about how a final report is filed.

It is very likely that Prashanth’s 498A case was investigated into as he and his family chose to fight. It is also likely that the police investigated the allegations as the normal route of transforming an FIR into a chargesheet would have invited scrutiny and brickbats from SIF volunteers .

I had a few reasons for uploading Prashanth’s final report:

• To show ordinary folks that something called a final report exists.
• To show them what it looks like, in order to enable them to ask for the same and get the police to INVESTIGATE along the lines of Prashant’s 498A final report.
• To enable those already chargesheeted to have their cases re-investigated. This can be done by filing RTIs on the investigation conducted by the police. The RTI can be based on this final report. The results of the RTI can be used to petition the police higher ups.
• To enable ordinary citizens to demand that they be treated equally and that an investigation into a criminal case is not just meant for the famous, the well heeled or the well connected.
• To raise questions about the investigations, if any, conducted in 498A cases. There are over 60,000 498A cases filed per year, yet the rate of conviction, as per Ranjana Kumari’s organisation is just 2% (Click here for the CSR study on 498a).
• How did all these cases end up in trial courts? How many of them were truly investigated? How many final reports were filed? Why is there is such a discrepancy in this ratio?

In Prashanth’s case, the final report is 30 pages long, double spaced, and include the allegations.. I will upload the FIR as soon as I get my hands on it. I have read a few FIRs and they all seem to come from a single template. Here are some of the common allegations listed in these FIRs including mine:

• In-laws preventing the bride from contacting her family – invariably the phone is taken away.
• Demand for dowry before and after the marriage, and non fulfillment of the demand leading to physical and mental harassment.
• The bride being thrown out of the matrimonial home with just the clothes on her body.
• The in-laws locking up the bride in a room.

Here are a few excerpts from the final report. :

• She was subjected to dental check up and the dentist certified her teeth were in good condition.
• She further complained that soon after the marriage, when she went to her in-laws house, Mr.Prashanth’s bedroom was not ready and the toilet was very worse. She was forced to stay in the living room. Her mother-in-law and sister-in-law used to harass her for not bringing enough jewellery, sarees and Dowry. Servants were not allowed to wash her clothes and to clean her toilet.
• Whenever her in-laws leave the house, she was locked inside the house and the watchman was informed not to open the door.
• She stated that since her passport was not returned to her, she could not take her ailing father abroad for best medical treatment, thereby she had lost her father and alleged that her father died only because of Mr.Prashanth. Hence she filed this complaint to punish her husband, her father-in-law and mother-in-law for the dowry demand, cruelty and harassment and also requested to return the valuable items left at her matrimonial house.

Here is the final report of Prashanth’s 498A case.

Prashant 498a Final Report (pdf)

______________________________________________________

Taking Stock After An Year Of Activism

“Feminism in India has no integrity. You can’t trust it”

– Madhu Purnima Kishwar

It’s time to reflect.

I was thrust into this mess on account of the ill advised actions of my ex-wife and her conniving father. The 498A was filed as means to force me into a settlement (they had my family in custody) or to take her back and sell myself for the money they offered me. I was never arrested. A charge sheet was never filed after my sister filed complaints against the police for their illegal actions.

I knew about 498A the day I filed for divorce, except, as time went by, I let down my guard and expected her to go her way and not resort to these tricks. I hoped she would gauge the depth of this pile of dung before jumping in. Fond hope on my part.

While my family was in custody and was being terrorized by the police, I looked for info on the web and talked to SIF volunteers. The SIF volunteers were great and were available round the clock. I can’t thank them enough, but, the info given didn’t go very far. I failed to understand the extent and depth of the mess my family and I were tossed into. In short, I was given helpful suggestions, but they were not applicable to my case and my situation.

The info on the web was sketchy at the best and inaccurate at the worst. An example was about the meaning of cognizable*, which was portrayed as the unrestricted power of the police to arrest, which is inaccurate.

*In a cognizable offense, the police are duty bound to register and investigate the complaint. Cognizable does not mean that the police can arrest you upon the filing of the FIR. They are required to investigate as a first step. 498A is a cognizable offence.

After writing a bunch of memos and press notes, enduring the rantings of Ranjana Kumari, Girija Vyas and the random Feminazis of India in the press, I was restless and felt a pervasive sense of not doing enough.

At this point I was introduced to blogging thanks to the idiocy of a bunch of embittered ex-wives, who spewed venom and gloated about the trouble they got their ex-hubbies and their families into. I was enraged over the fact that they felt smug about the plight of their mothers and sisters in law. I started blogging to mock them and developed an appreciation for the possibilities that blogging opens up. As a footnote, I take full credit for shutting them down.

I felt the need for A Guide To Surviving IPC 498A, as at this stage, though I knew and understood a lot, it was obvious to me that there was nothing anywhere that tied it all together or served as a repository of information.

The motivation to educate others about their Fundamental Rights was given by the book by Prof Som K Shah, Faith Belied, which mentioned Joginder Kumar Vs The State Of UP, which, for the first time, detailed the limits on the powers of the police to arrest.

Taking that as a base, I started digging and soon found DK Basu Vs State Of WB and more judgments from the Supreme Court. Initially I focused on the judgments curtailing/defining the powers of the Indian Police. I got pretty good at digging up judgments at Judis.

Around this time, I received a gift from the gods, in the form of a Judgment by Justice Shiv Narain Dhingra, which is now popularly known as the 498A Income Tax judgment. This and the following judgments by him were my first posts.

I put all this together and wrote up the Survivor’s Guide To IPC 498A. I did have some friends proof read it and had to edit it, as my anger was apparent in tone and the choice of words. As an example, I referred to the 498A wives as bitches. Nothing wrong with that, except, when writing, moderation should be exercised, to reach out to a wider audience.

I kept digging through Judis and the web and as I came across relevant judgments and material, I blogged them in order to serve as a repository of information.

By July, I had it all together, but had to wait until November to inaugurate the 498A Survival Kit, as I was having the document reviewed for accuracy by a former IPS officer.

By then, I was burnt out and decided to walk away for a short time. Upon my return, I was able to have the Gujju version up. I also made a major update and uploaded it.

The blog averages over 400 visitors a day and they are from all over the world. Check out the cluster map on the lower right side of this page, to see the spread. It also looks like I may have a small but regular set of readers, though I don’t know who they are.

498A and the associated asinine laws, though formulated with good intentions, are inherently flawed. The establishment has taken advantage of these flaws and it is now an extortion racket feeding the ravenous appetite of the corrupt Indian Police force, the lower judiciary, NGOs like CSR, statutory bodies like the NCW and worse, has become a component of vote bank politics.

Who cares if more than a 100,000 women have been arrested in 4 years, or the Indian criminal justice system is clogged, or the fact that the real victims of domestic violence or dowry harassment will never get justice as the cases will drag on for years due to the numerous frivolous cases that have been filed?

As depressing as this situation seems, the tide is turning.

I have asserted, from the moment that I came across Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP, that the police have been arresting people in 498A cases in contravention of the orders of the Supreme Court. My stand has been vindicated by the recent emergence of a memo from 2002, by the Hyderabad Comm Of Police, MV Krishna Rao, who forbade any 498A arrests without the authorisation of the DCP of the investigating officer. This is a standing order, in accordance with the Supreme Court judgment. Further vindication came in the form of the Delhi Police Commissioner issuing a circular forbidding 498A Arrests W/O Permission Of DCP

People on the ground are finally questioning the cops about arbitrary arrests and I expect this to spread, especially as the translations in the regional languages come into play.

I have made some lasting friendships in this time of my activism and also had to endure the idiocy of morons. This battle can be fought and will be won, though it will take time.

So how does one fight this hydra headed monster?

As a first step, it must be recognized that it is the radical feminists and crass opportunists of India, who are preventing any kind of a discussion or amendment to this flawed law from taking place. These radical feminists are like the Taliban. They are radical, they are stupid, they are corrupt and they will be defeated. The domestic violence act is their swan song and the sinking of the Sati Law is proof of their diminishing clout.

As a next step, it is essential to re-frame this fight as anything else other than that between men and women. The Feminazis got this far as they successfully portrayed themselves as “Abala Nari” vs the “Rakshas Ravana” .

SIF is fighting this as a way to protect the Indian family structure. The petrol pump scam tainted Girija Vyas, feeling the sting of the inroads made by SIF, is now attempting to claim this mantle. I feel that this issue can also be framed as a fight against corruption in India.

The Feminazis of India are like hyenas and vultures, they feed on the helpless. They have successfully pushed aside respected women rights activists like Madhu Kishwar and have hijacked the cause of the empowerment of women to serve their selfish ends. They are the enablers in setting the corrupt establishment upon vulnerable individuals and families. They play the role of useful idiots for the establishment, in return for access and privilege, and they have the MPs cowed. They have been attempting to intimidate the judiciary with varying degrees of success, under the garb of “gender sensitization”.

The Feminazis haven’t faced organized opposition due to the nature of this problem. This is not oppression of a particular caste, religion, language or sex. This is persecution of small units in this multitude of millions for the purposes of empty propaganda; to claim that the establishment has legislated laws for women, is pro women and thus pandering to a perceived vote bank. In reality, as with everything else, this is empty propaganda which enriches the establishment and nothing concrete is accomplished. If 100,000 women have been arrested in 4 years, you won’t hear a peep of protest as it doesn’t matter. They don’t count as a voting block as they are scattered across the country and so they won’t dent an election. Besides, who really understands fully the pernicious theory of vote-bank politics?. These numbers are a drop in the 500,000,000 women of India. In addition, these persecuted individuals and their families come from the middle and upper middle classes and they are spread out over the country with the only unifying thread being that they have been 498A’d or DV Act’d. Finally groups like SIF, though small in number are unifying and fighting the establishment.

The most prominent Feminazis are unmarried or divorced. Their temperament was never tempered by the pangs of birthing or gazing fondly upon their own flesh and blood, be it a boy or a girl. They want privilege, but don’t want to earn it, but want it handed over under the garb of equality. 498A and the DV Act have nothing to do with womens rights or feminism, these laws are designed to feed on the helpless and unsuspecting.

What do they have to gain from propagating and spreading this misery ? The explanation is simple. It is money, lifestyle, access to power and privilege, a paycheck and I don’t know what else. I can only stoop to a certain level of dirt in terms of speculating about motivation. Regardless they are the beneficiaries of this misery. They are backed up by large amounts of money in funds from the center or from the UN. They have the megaphone and can lock up the print media and the TV channels with their rants and propaganda.

But, alas, they have decisively lost the online battle. An example is the maligning of Justice Dhingra. Before the advent of this blog, anyone who read about him would pass him off as a male chauvinist and a sexist, thanks to the malicious propaganda of Indira Jaising.

I’ve set the record straight and effectively countered Indira Jaising’s mud slinging. She had made it her mission to malign Justice Dhingra at any given opportunity. As a writer with a guaranteed readership of at least 12,000 a month, I assert that Justice Shiv Narain Dhingra can be ranked amongst the greatest judges in the history of our nation. All you need to do is read his judgments, any judgments and you will understand what I mean. Those of us, who’ve been entangled in this mess need to thank the gods for their gift, in the form of this great judge.

I work hard, stay fit and have loads of fun and I don’t believe that I will ever marry again. My ex-wife gave me a precious gift, a gift so precious that few men would have ever received it. This is the ability to live alone and endure with ease, the pangs of loneliness. On the occasions that I felt it, all it took was a recollection of my life with her, of her nagging, her threats and accusations of incest and the blackmail she subjected me to, and I am back on my feet.

There is a lot to do, and I am an idea factory, but often, just like Cassandra, my words fall on deaf ears and I feel frustrated at the stupidity. This is the reason for the existence today of the 498A Survival Kit. Fortunately, unlike Cassandra who ended up as a slave to the Greeks, I’ve been gaining in credibility and being listened to. The biggest example of this is the widening recognition of the importance of Joginder Kumar Vs State of UP, as a cornerstone of defense against arbitrary arrest by the 498A accused and activists.

As I drift away to resurrect my once promising career, I leave with a hope that I may have laid a foundation.

Getting back to the 498A wives, here is a song, whose message their parents should have drilled into their stupid heads: Itna Nazuk Na Bano.

I want to share with you the approach I took to get through my darkest days.

When ever you feel overwhelmed and unable to go on, just remember this, get through today and wait for tomorrow. Tomorrow will dawn, glorious and bright, and you can pick up where you left off, filled with energy after a night’s rest.

The 498A wives have a biological clock ticking. Each day you’ve gained is a day they’ve lost. Run out the clock on them. This is the way to beat them.

______________________________________________________________________________________

The Guide To Surviving IPC 498A Updated !

Folks,

I updated the document/e-book to reflect the new judgments and added the following:

• Table Of Contents for chapter 1
• What is AB?
• Passport cannot be impounded judgment
• Delhi HC RTI judgment
• Mentioned AP police memo on NO Arrests- (Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP)
• Expanded On Jurisdiction
• Explained Quash petitions
• Interrogation tactics used by cops
• NRI cases jurisdiction
• Case lost in foreign court cannot be re-fought in India
• Compounding a non compoundable case

In addition, the document is fully bookmarked for easy navigation in Adobe Acrobat. Please enable bookmarks to make it easier for yourself to navigate.

Here is the link to the document:

A Guide To Surviving IPC 498A

The rest of the material is here:

The 498A Survival Kit

______________________________________________

Justice Dhingra Explains Section 482 Of IPC (HC Quash Petition)

The courts have always been reluctant to quash a case under Section 482 IPC.

I have written about it here: Understanding High Court Quash Petitions (Section 482 Of CrPC)

The best explanation of the view of the courts, in my opinion, has been given by Justice Dhingra.

This is what he says:

“While exercising powers under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. the Court has to keep in mind that it should not ordinarily embark upon an enquiry whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it accusation would not be sustained. This is a function of the Trial Court. Though the judicial process should not be an instrument of oppression or needless harassment but the Court should be circumspect and judicious in exercising discretion and should take all relevant facts and circumstances in consideration before issuing process under Section 482 lest the Section becomes an instrument in the hands of accused persons to claim differential treatment only because the accused persons can spend money to approach higher forums. This Section is not an instrument handed over to an accused to short circuit a prosecution and bring about its sudden death. “

Here is the judgment I pulled this from : Justice Dhingra Explains Section 482

____________________________________________________

Justice Dhingra: Police Do Not Investigate In 498A Cases (Crl.Apl No. 696/2004)

News Flash

This judgment of Justice Dhingra led to the standing order from Delhi Police Commissioner YS Dadwal, prohibiting the arrests in 498A cases without the permission of the DCP (Jun/21/2008).

You can read about this here:  Delhi Police Commissioner: No 498A Arrests W/O Permission Of DCP

__________

Publication: Times Of India Delhi;
Date:Nov 2, 2007;
Section:Times City;
Page Number:5
HC: Wife can’t use failed marriage to harass in-laws
Abhinav Garg | TNN

New Delhi: Dismayed by the increasing misuse of anti-dowry laws, the Delhi high court has observed that failed marriages are ‘‘not a crime’’ and berated the tendency by women to see souring of matrimony as valid ground to get even with the husband and in-laws or to extract money.
‘‘A failed marriage is not a crime. However, provisions of section 498-A (cruelty by in-laws or husband) are being used to convert failed marriages into a crime and people are using this as a tool to extract as much monetary benefit as possible,’’ Justice S N Dhingra said on Thursday while acquitting the husband, in laws and ‘jethani’ of a woman who had alleged that they poured kerosene on her and set her on fire due to her inability to get dowry or secure an employment for her husband.
‘‘It must be acknowledged that marriages do fail and there is a mismatch not only in an arranged union but even in love marriages, which is discovered during the continuation of married life,’’ the judge remarked as it turned out that the harassment charge was slapped by the wife because she was unhappy with her husband’s unemployment and a life of penury.

Excerpts:

• ” It is her own case that a container of 05 litres of kerosene oil was poured on her. 05 litres of kerosene oil is an enormous quantity of oil and if this quantity is poured on a person and fire is lit, he/she will immediately turn into a fire ball. Presuming that the complainant had extinguished the fire immediately by pouring a bucket full of water on herself and by tearing her clothes, in that case the unburnt kerosene oil would remain on clothes and she would have been profusely smelling of kerosene oil. Not only her clothes but her entire body would have been drenched with kerosene oil and her clothes would have been drenched with kerosene oil and water. It is not her case that when she was removed to hospital her clothes were changed or she was washed off and bathed, rather her allegations are that she was continuously beaten for two hours before having been removed to the hospital and she kept lying there for two hours in kerosene oil and water. It cannot be believed that on seeing a patient in such a condition, doctor would have closed his eyes and would not record the condition in the MLC. “
• “Her husband was not a criminal neither it is alleged that he had any criminal background. A poor man who was starving for his survival and had to work as a labour from morning till evening for livelihood, could not have given threats to kill his own son and father-in-law. This story of threat seems to have been developed later on by the complainant in consultation with father. “
• “The Courts must be very cautious during trials of such offences. In all these cases in the name of investigation, except recording statement of complainant and her few relatives nothing is done by police. The police does not verify any circumstantial evidence nor collect any other evidence about the claims made by the complainant. No evidence about giving of dowry or resources of the complainant’s family claiming spending of huge amounts is collected by the police. This all is resulting into gross misuse of the provisions of law.”
• “From the entire documents and the testimony of the witnesses I come to the conclusion that it is an unfortunate case where the complainant by making false statement implicated the entire family in offenses of under Section 307 and 498 A IPC. The Trial Court was not cautious enough to even look to admitted documents on record before convicting the family on mere statement of an estranged wife. Trial Courts should guard themselves from being swayed by emotions. They should consider entire circumstances and should carefully analyze the entire evidence. Poverty should not be allowed to become a crime. Neither failed marriage be permitted to be a crime.”

Here is the judgment: Delhi HC: Wife Can’t Use Failed Marriage To Harass In-Laws

___________________________________

Justice Dhingra Ensures The Jailing Of A Corrupt Female CAW Cell Officer-2007

Justice Dhingra in action again.

This time he denies the appeal of convicted, corrupt CAW cell SI. This judgment more than reinforces my assertion that 498A and all this crap about protecting women is just a smokescreen to make money of the misery of citizens.

Here is an excerpt:

“The evidence shows that she was posted out on 28th September, 1999 and the bribe was accepted on 1st October, 1999. There is no evidence that complainant was aware of her posting out from the department. Moreover, if she was posted out on 28th October, 1999 she had no business to be there in CAW Cell. Her presence there itself shows that she had come to the office of CAW Cell only for the purpose of obtaining bribe. Even if she was not working as investigating officer, she took advantage of ignorance of the complainant that she was no more investigating officer and still accepted the bribe. I, therefore, consider that in such a case where police official, and those who are responsible for proper running of criminal justice system , indulge into the corruption, the Court should take serious view. Considering all facts I do not find it a fit case where the sentence of the appellant be suspended. The application is hereby dismissed. Nothing observed herein shall prejudice the decision of appeal on merits”

Here is the judgment:

Justice Dhingra Ensures The Jailing Of A Corrupt CAW Cell Officer-2007

___________________________________________