Archive for the 'Indian Police' Category

Interpol’s Most Wanted – NRI Grooms Not Wanted

This post is  about contrasting the dangerous fugitives wanted by Interpol with the bogus ones (non resident Indian, NRI, grooms) designated as such by the Indian police.  As expected, NRI victims of the 498A extortion racket are not on the Red Corner Notice (RCN) list of the most dangerous fugitives wanted by Interpol.

You can see the list of Interpol’s most wanted here:

http://www.interpol.int/Public/NoticesUN/Search/Recent.asp

To all of you NRIs threatened with RCN notices and extraditions, don’t worry about it. It is not going to happen.

This is how it worked.  If an NRI had marital issues, his Indian bride would run back to India and file a 498A case against him. If he failed to pay the demanded amount, the bride, in collusion with the police would try to bring him back to India — to have him arrested on arrival. If all attempts to entice him to India failed, the police issued an RCN against him.  Before long, Interpol was receiving numerous RCNs from India; mostly for 498A cases. “Pussy Politics” Umapathi used to boast about the effectiveness of this tactic in coercing NRIs to settle their 498A cases.

Interpol stopped issuing  RCNs in 498A cases — effectively ending a tool of extortion used by the corrupt AP Police. They realized that they were being used in this extortion racket.

Here is a picture of this myopic IPS officer, hobnobbing with the likes of Indira Jaising. Our man had been out playing pussy politics instead of working to end the trafficking of vulnerable Indian women.

IGP-Umapathy

To put things in perspective, lumping NRIs (mostly techies), battling 498A charges in India, with the likes of Dawood Ibrahim and Osama Bin Laden, is ridiculous. This is a very poor reflection on the integrity and intelligence (or lack of) of officers of the Indian police force, such as “Pussy Politics” Umapathi.

SIF volunteers designated him a pinhead for these actions. You can read about that below:

Umapathi-Pinhead

“Pussy Politics” Umapathi is supposed to have lobbied hard to re-instate RCNs against NRI grooms — to no avail.  I’m sure it hurt to see the end of such a profitable revenue stream.

You can read about that here:

While on the topic of pussy politics, let this be a warning to all you officers of the Indian police force indulging in the same — you are being watched.

Interpol’s decision to eliminate 498A RCNs is a result of persistent efforts by US based NRIs caught up in this racket.  You can read about the elimination of one such RCN against an NRI  here:

A 498A Fighter Gets Interpol To Cancel His RCN

Thank you Interpol for waking up to this extortion racket !!!

Given below is the Interpol most wanted list. As you can see, NRI grooms aren’t amongst them !

Interpol-Most-Wanted____________________________________

Advertisements

Indira Jaising Was Paid US $1,40,000 For “Staying Alive”

Folks,

I have always maintained that pussy politics is a very profitable venture.

How profitable?

A whopping US $1,40,000 or Rs 60,00,000 Lakhs (approx) a report profitable.

What am I talking about ?

Staying Alive for a $1,40,000 is what I am talking about.

Okay. Still didn’t get it?

You will…

On the first anniversary of the “clumsily drafted” domestic violence act, Indira Jaising had moaned  that an year after the law to protect women from domestic violence was enacted, it was being defeated by social prejudice, blindspots, brickbats from bloggers and searing criticism from the Justices of the Supreme Court in the form of Batra Vs Batra, 2007.

If you don’t know who Indira Jaising is, check out her resume to get an Idea:

Jaisin’s Bio

And here’s her picture:

In an article published in the Indian Express, titled Family against woman, she wrote that:

“One year is an appropriate time to evaluate the functioning of a law. However, there are no systems to do this on a systematic basis since there are no computerised data bases of orders and judgments. Given this, the Lawyers Collective, which was largely involved with this law in its formative stages, undertook the task of evaluating enforcement, using available data. The chief justice of India facilitated the collection of data from different high courts. Our report, ‘Staying Alive’, is based on this.

I started to read the report and realized it was nonsense. Bored me to death. (You can’t download the report as the Unifem link is dead)

Here is copy from 2012:

http://www.lawyerscollective.org/files/Staying%20Alive%205th%20M&E.pdf

I wondered about the time spent on developing this report; the pretty graphics to adorn it; the money spent on it. It must have taken many man hours to write that report and I am sure that unlike us activists, the practitioners of pussy politics don’t do things for free. After all, their livelihood is based on peddling slogans about “protecting women”.

To illustrate, A Guide To Surviving IPC 498A has been downloaded close to 100,000 times as of today. I wrote it at no cost except for the investment in time.

That brings us to the question. How many people do you think would have read ‘Staying Alive’? Ain’t that a colossal waste of cash?

I actually thought (for a short while) that she did it for free as part of her commitment to women’s issues. I can get a little delusional at times !

Here is a revelation.

UNIFEM paid the Lawyers Collective (meaning Indira Jaising) a whopping $1,40,000.00 US Dollars to write that report. That means Rs 60,00,000.00 (approx).

To truly understand the meaning of this princely sum, I want you to ask yourself if you’ll ever see that kind of money in your life, in one cheque, and for doing just one task.

I know that I won’t.  At least for not indulging in pussy politics.
Think about it this way: can you imagine the Chief Of Army Staff walk away with Rs 60,00,000 upon retiring, and after putting in 30+ years in the country’s service?

What about your neighborhood bank manager. Can you see him walk away with half that amount in his PF fund ?

And here is my question. What did she do with all that money? Please don’t tell me that the shoddy report consumed all the $1,40,000.00 US Dollars !

Here’s a snippet from the report: 

Here is the UNIFEM annual report that shows the breakdown of payments. The payment to Indira Jaising’s Lawyers’ Collective is on page 23:

http://www.unifem.org/attachments/products/AnnualReport2006_2007_eng.pdf

Here is the extracted page that shows the funding received by the Lawyers Collective:

Lawyers Collective UNIFEM $140K USD Payment For Report (extract)

Indira Jaising is the architect of the clumsily drafted Indian domestic violence Act whose most egregious provision is the right to residence.  She has been paid to do an assessment on her own work. Would you expect her to do an impartial assessment and not paper over the flaws in the law affecting the rights and lives of millions ?

Where is the integrity in this process?

Since we are talking about Indira Jaising,  I think you need to know about she said about the Indian police force.  See the article below:

Indira Jaising: “Torture And Police Brutality Are Endemic In India”

She should know. She enabled the extortion of Rs 40 Lakhs from an NRI  by aiding the jailing of his Delhi resident sister in a Calcutta jail for a month. The jailed lady was released after her NRI brother paid Rs 40Lakhs to his estranged wife. You can read about this here:

And did anyone wonder why the woman was jailed though she didn’t commit any crime…?

Hey ! What about due process rights of the jailed lady protected in Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP? Did Indira Jaising think about the seminal judgment of the Supreme Court or for an instant?

And this egregious action was done by a supposed defender of Human Rights  and a constitutional lawyer !!

Aaaaaaahhhhhh!!

This is what pussy politics is about folks. The practitioners scream and shout about women’s right, but in reality, there is nothing done to empower women. There is nothing noble about this.  It is a business — a very profitable business where $1,40,000 can be paid for producing a silly report!!!

Is it a wonder that there is such a strong opposition by Indian pussy politicians to the amendment of 498A and the domestic violence act ?

Darn !

I am on the wrong side of pussy politics. There is a load of money to be made + the perks and lifestyle and access to power and privilege. All you need to do is shout yourself hoarse and claim your commitment to “womens issues” and play ostrich to the fact that over a 1,20,000 women have been illegally arrested by the corrupt and brutal Indian police since 2004.

It’s no wonder that the Indian police force is jumping on this  gravy train too, all in the name of protecting women

I leave you with what Madhu Purnima Kishwar has to say about feminism in India:

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

She is sooooo right !!!

_________________________________________________________________________________

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:

Joginder Kumar Vs State Of UP – 1994

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:

____________________________________________________________

NCRB: Over 1,30,000 Women Arrested Under 498A Since 2004

Over 1,30,000 Women Have Been Arrested Under Section 498A Since 2004.

I pulled the data from the NCRB annual publications on Crime In India. You can find this data under the tables section, specifically, TABLE-12.2,  Persons Arrested Under IPC Crimes (Crime Head-Wise And Gender-Wise). Links to these tables are given below:

The NCRB compiled data from the above links is given below and highlighted in yellow:

The next thing to look at are the number of Final Reports that were submitted. The data below gives you the true picture of what the police have been doing. The 498A cases are highlighted in yellow.

Disposal Of IPC Cases By Police (NCRB) 2004-2006

Why is there such a large discrepancy in the ratio of cases closed with a final report to those which were charge sheeted ? It is obvious that the police aren’t doing their work. And why would they, these women were easy pickings for these hyenas. All they had to do was swoop in and scoop up these women, ignoring their rights against arbitrary arrest. These women include young  girls to grandmothers.

To truly understand the scope of this egregious act by the Govt Of India, here is some data from the days of the British raj.

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.

The Govt of India, under the sway of the radical feminists of India, has been arresting over 27,000 women/year of all ages since 2004. In all these cases, these women, including nursing mothers, little girls and grandmothers, were arrested without an investigation into the veracity of the complaints filed.

The Indian police know about the abuse of this law as they are the primary beneficiaries of this extortion racket.

The Indian courts know this this too. The Higher judiciary is cleaner than the lower judiciary, which is nothing short of a sewer, that people entangled in this mess fall into.

Worse, officials and agencies of The Govt Of India know about it. I quote:

  • The idea should be to see how the police system works, the concerned official out there should not lodge an FIR and arrest the groom and his side before investigating. These kind of shortcuts are mainly tainting the image of the prevailing law. The way uncles, aunts are also humiliated is not fair, we agree that they should not be booked until a full-proof investigation is carried out. Instead of amending the law we should try to improve our police system and investigating procedure. Spokesperson Of The NCW, 14 /Jan /2007, TOI Article: “NRIs cry foul over IPC 498A, dowry law”
  • I object to this exploitation of the law. It is wrong to misuse the law. The law is for those who need it. -Union Minister For WCD, Renuka Chaudhary, on the Arjun Singh 498A episode.

So why isn’t this law amended to at least introduce some checks and balances to prevent its abuse?

The answer lies in the fact that this whole thing is a profitable venture for all concerned, including internationally funded NGOs like CSR

Finally, take a look at total number of people arrested under this law.

Total Arrests Under 498A Since 2004 (NCRB)

There are more people arrested under this law than those accused of MURDER!

It is the families, especially women, who get caught up in this extortion racket who pay for the perfidy of this establishment !

Shame !!! Shame !! Shame !!

________________________________

A Compilation Of Police Interrogation Tactics

I pulled this from various sites on the net. The most common tactics of interrogation, used by the Indian police, is to beat a confession out of a suspect or intimidate the suspect into signing a confession.

My family was subjected to the tactic of intimidation. Among the many indignities heaped upon them, they were made to watch a suspect subjected to third degree treatment in their presence.

Here is a list of the most common interrogation techniques:

  • Exaggerating the strength of their case: They tell you that they have recordings, fingerprints, documents, eyewitnesses, etc. All of this may true or all may be false but you simply don’t know because you are isolated. They try and get to you as soon as possible to play on your fears and work that confused state of mind to their advantage.
  • Good cop, bad cop: this is an age-old tactic. The police will work in teams of good cop and bad cop. The bad cop will shout at you and attempt to intimidate you, and may even rough you up. The good cop walks in and will apply the healing solution. He may even yell at the bad cop. Apart from exchanging pleasantries, speak to him about all other things at your own risk.
  • Comparison: They will convince you that they think you are the least to blame for what happened and that, therefore, you will not suffer as severe a sentence. It’s the other guys they are really after and if you cooperate, they will put a good word in for you.
  • Small talk/Chit chatting: What is critical to getting the ultimate admission is to get you talking in the first place – about anything – usually in a “friendly” manner. They will try and find something that you have in common and just have a regular conversation. Then, when you feel comfortable just talking, they will move into the area of the crime. It’s the old story about the frog – try and place him in the boiling pot and he will jump out immediately. But put him in a cold pot and then slowly turn up the heat, he will die before he knows what happened to him.
  • Separation: if the accused, like in most 498A cases, belong to a family, then the family members may be separated and each will be told that the other confessed. Watch out for this. This is the most pernicious tactic in my opinion.
  • Threats And Intimidation: This is the standard operating procedure. The police may threaten to book you under more charges. Wish them the best. These charges need to be proven in court and lies don’t stand up to impartial, intelligent scrutiny. There will threats of physical violence, direct or suggested. Just stand up to it.
  • Promises: They will cut a “deal” with you or “put a good word in” for you. Don’t be fooled. They have no power whatsoever to make deals – only prosecutors can do that and, even then, the judge is never bound by any bargain.
  • Furniture And Spatial Psychology: When in the interview room look out for use of furniture. The power of persuasion is greater when the interviewer removes the barrier of the desk that creates a division of “their” space and “your” space. It is common for the interviewers to touch the suspect in a gesture of support and friendship. If the interviewer is on the opposite side of the table, such a gesture is limited. You best defense is to SHOW NO EMOTION. The whole atmosphere inside a police station is geared towards creating an environment of stress so as to break down the suspects morale. It is easy to accept the hand of friendship in such a situation, DON’T break your silence. You, as the suspect, will have your back to the door. This is done to make you feel apprehensive each time someone comes into the room. In addition, the seat for the solicitor will be out of your eye line. The interviewer will often fall silent, putting pressure on you to fill in these “pregnant pauses” – maintain your silence.
  • Expressions Of Approval: Look out for expressions of approval, both verbal and non verbal. Verbal: “That’s good”, “Yes, go on” and “I like that approach”. Non verbal: smiling, nodding, looking at a fellow interviewer as if to say “She’s/he’s right you know.” These are all indications of the frame of mind of the interviewer. You may be offered compliments e.g. “You’re no fool”, etc. Non verbal compliments such as a little shake of the head as if to say that I admire you for saying that. The principle behind all this is to make the suspect feel good and to encourage further dialogue.

CHRI has brought out a flier about police interrogation —> CHRI Police Interrogation

Have your lawyer with you at all times and maintain your silence. The right against self incrimination is a fundamental right.

The police cannot torture you or extract a confession out of you either. This is illegal and if they do so, they are in contempt of the many judgments of the Supreme Court in this regard.

_____________________________________________

NHRC Publications: Priced And Non Priced

NHRC Publications

The Publications brought out by the National Human Rights Commission are either free or priced. In case it is a priced publication, then a Demand Draft for the amount that covers the cost of the book has to be made in favour of the National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi payable at New Delhi . Some Publications are available in electronic format on this website. To view or download, simply click on the appropriate link given below:

http://nhrc.nic.in/publications.htm

___________________________________________________

National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) Guidelines On Arrest

Here is the original : Guidelines on Polygraph Tests And Arrests

You can download the pdf of my version, for printing here:

NHRC GUIDELINES REGARDING ARREST (pdf)

Need for Guidelines:

Arrest involves restriction of liberty of a person arrested and therefore, infringes the basic human rights of liberty. Nevertheless the Constitution of India as well as International human rights law recognise the power of the State to arrest any person as a part of its primary role of maintaining law and order. The Constitution requires a just, fair and reasonable procedure established by law under which alone such deprivation of liberty is permissible.

Although Article 22(1) of the Constitution provides that every person placed under arrest shall be informed as soon as may be the ground of arrest and shall not be denied the right to consult and be defended by a lawyer of his choice and S.50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr. PC) requires a police officer arresting any person to “forthwith communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or other grounds for such arrest”. in actual practice these requirements are observed more in the breach. Likewise, the requirement of production of the arrested person before the court promptly which is mandated both under the Constitution [Article22(2)] and the Cr. PC (Section 57] is also not adhered to strictly.

A large number of complaints pertaining to Human Rights violations are in the area of abuse of police powers, particularly those of arrest and detention. It has, therefore, become necessary, with a view to narrowing the gap between law and practice, to prescribe guidelines regarding arrest even while at the same time not unduly curtailing the power of the police to effectively maintain and enforce law and order and proper investigation.

PRE-ARREST

Ø The power to arrest without a warrant should be exercised only after a reasonable satisfaction is reached, after some investigation, as to the genuineness and bonafides of a complaint and a reasonable belief as to both the person’s complicity as well as the need to effect arrest. [Joginder Kumar’s case- (1994) 4 SCC 260).

Ø Arrest cannot be justified merely on the existence of power, as a matter of law, to arrest without a warrant in a cognizable case.

Ø After Joginder Kumar’s pronouncement of the Supreme Court the question whether the power of arrest has been exercised reasonably or not is clearly a justiciable one.

Ø Arrest in cognizable cases may be considered justified in one or other of the following circumstances:

(i) The case involves a grave offence like murder, dacoity, robbery, rape etc. and it is necessary to arrest the suspect to prevent him from escaping or evading the process of law.

(ii) The suspect is given to violent behaviour and is likely to commit further offences.

(iii) The suspect requires to be prevented from destroying evidence or interfering with witnesses or warning other suspects who have not yet been arrested.

(iv) The suspect is a habitual offender who, unless arrested, is likely to commit similar or further offences. [3rd Report of National Police Commission]

Ø Except in heinous offences, as mentioned above, an arrest must be avoided if a police officer issues notice to the person to attend the police station and not leave the station without permission. (see Joginder Kumar’s case (1994) SCC 260).

Ø The power to arrest must be avoided where the offences are bailable unless there is a strong apprehension of the suspect absconding .

Ø Police officers carrying out an arrest or interrogation should bear clear identification and name tags with designations. The particulars of police personnel carrying out the arrest or interrogation should be recorded contemporaneously, in a register kept at the police station.

ARREST

Ø As a rule use of force should be avoided while effecting arrest. However, in case of forcible resistance to arrest, minimum force to overcome such resistance may be used. However, care must be taken to ensure that injuries to the person being arrested, visible or otherwise, is avoided.

Ø The dignity of the person being arrested should be protected. Public display or parading of the person arrested should not be permitted at any cost.

Ø Searches of the person arrested must be done with due respect to the dignity of the person, without force or aggression and with care for the person’s right to privacy. Searches of women should only be made by other women with strict regard to decency. (S.51(2) Cr.PC.)

Ø The use of handcuffs or leg chains should be avoided and if at all, it should be resorted to strictly in accordance with the law repeatedly explained and mandated in judgment of the Supreme Court in Prem Shanker Shukla v. Delhi Administration [(1980) 3 SCC 526] and Citizen for Democracy v. State of Assam[(1995) 3 SCC 743].

Ø As far as is practicable women police officers should be associated where the person or persons being arrested are women. The arrest of women between sunset and sunrise should be avoided.

Ø Where children or juveniles are sought to be arrested, no force or beatings should be administered under any circumstances. Police Officers, may for this purpose, associate respectable citizens so that the children or juveniles are not terrorised and minimal coercion is used.

Ø Where the arrest is without a warrant, the person arrested has to be immediately informed of the grounds of arrest in a language which he or she understands. Again, for this purpose, the police, if necessary may take the help of respectable citizens. These grounds must have already been recorded in writing in police records. The person arrested should be shown the written reasons as well and also given a copy on demand. (S.50(1) Cr.PC.)

Ø The arrested person can, on a request made by him or her, demand that a friend, relative or other person known to him be informed of the fact of his arrest and the place of his detention. The police should record in a register the name of the person so informed. [Joginder Kumar’s case (supra)].

Ø If a person is arrested for a bailable offence, the police officer should inform him of his entilement to be released on bail so that he may arrange for sureties. (S.50(2) Cr.PC.)

Ø Apart from informing the person arrested of the above rights, the police should also inform him of his right to consult and be defended by a lawyer of his choice. He should also be informed that he is entitled to free legal aid at state expense [D.K. Basu’s case (1997) 1 SCC].

Ø When the person arrested is brought to the police station, he should, if he makes a request in this regard, be given prompt medical assistance. He must be informed of this right. Where the police officer finds that the arrested person is in a condition where he is unable to make such request but is in need of medical help, he should promptly arrange for the same. This must also be recorded contemporaneously in a register. The female requesting for medical help should be examined only by a female registered medical practitioner. (S.53 Cr.PC.)

Ø Information regarding the arrest and the place of detention should be communicated by the police officer effecting the arrest without any delay to the police Control Room and District / State Headquarters. There must be a monitoring mechanism working round the clock.

Ø As soon as the person is arrested, police officer effecting the arrest shall make a mention of the existence or non-existence of any injury(s) on the person of the arrestee in the register of arrest. If any injuries are found on the person of the arrestee, full description and other particulars as to the manner in which the injuries were caused should be mentioned in the register, which entry shall also be signed by the police officer and the arrestee. At the time of release of the arrestee, a certificate to the above effect under the signature of the police officer shall be issued to the arrestee.

Ø If the arrestee has been remanded to police custody under the orders of the court, the arrestee should be subjected to medical examination by a trained Medical Officer every 48 hours during his detention in custody by a doctor on the panel of approved doctors appointed by Director, Health Services of the concerned State or Union Territory. At the time of his release from the police custody, the arrestee shall be got medically examined and a certificate shall be issued to him stating therein the factual position of the existence or nonexistence of any injuries on his person.

POST ARREST

Ø The person under arrest must be produced before the appropriate court within 24 hours of the arrest (Ss 56 and 57 Cr.PC).

Ø The person arrested should be permitted to meet his lawyer at any time during the interrogation.

Ø The interrogation should be conducted in a clearly identifiable place, which has been notified for this purpose by the Government. The place must be accessible and the relatives or friend of the person arrested must be informed of the place of interrogation taking place.

Ø The methods of interrogation must be consistent with the recognised rights to life, dignity and liberty and right against torture and degrading treatment.

ENFORCEMENT OF GUIDELINES

1. The guidelines must be translated in as many languages as possible and distributed to every police station. It must also be incorporated in a handbook which should be given to every policeman.

2. Guidelines must receive maximum publicity in the print or other electronic media. It should also be prominently displayed on notice board, in more than one language, in every police station.

3. The police must set up a complaint redressal mechanism, which will promptly investigate complaints of violation of guidelines and take corrective action.

4 The notice board which displays guidelines must also indicate the location of the complaints redressal mechanism and how that body can be approached.

5. NGOs and public institutions including courts, hospitals, universities etc., must be involved in the dissemination of these guidelines to ensure the widest possible reach.

6. The functioning of the complaint redressal mechanism must be transparent and its reports accessible.

7. Prompt action must be taken against errant police officers for violation of the guidelines. This should not be limited to departmental enquiries but also set in motion the criminal justice mechanism.

8. Sensitisation and training of police officers is essential for effective implementation of the guidelines.

________________________________


Visitors Since Mar/14/07

  • 3,146,034

Cluster Map

Live Traffic

Archives

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 MyFreeCopyright.com Registered & Protected Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.

Disclaimer:

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
November 2017
M T W T F S S
« Nov    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

%d bloggers like this: