.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

IPC Section 498-A: Misuse

Dedicated to the Victimised Indian Families, Who are falsely threatened & Blackmailed by the Indian Daughters-In-Law & her family members, and those Victimised families who are already falsely charged under the Section 498A. Its all about False charges of Dowry Law, Domestic Violence, Alimony, Marriage and Divorce. NOTE: All articles are my personal copyright. They may be republished if the source is acknowledged and a link provided to this site. This is not an Anti-Women Blog. Read Disclaimer.

My Photo
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Women go to the police with a complaint (may be false), but the system provides to record that as a criminal complaint and that data adds in to the National Statistics of Crime Against Women. When male goes with a genuine complaint the police at max can record a Non Cognizable offence against the women. That will never reflect in the statistics. Then how will one guage crime against men? Every 100 Suicides in India have 63 Males and 37 Females. Every 100 male suicides have 45 married males, and every 100 women suicides have 25 married Women. Married women suicides have default arrests of the inlaws under presumed dowry death. Married men suicides entitle wife for a 50% share in property. What kind of equality is this? I thank you for visiting my blog, Please visit again. And I welcome you to participate on my Blog. [indianhusbands (at-the-rate) yahoo (dot) com]. Click here for Main Page

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

498a and DV Act, A Forced Justification.

On the completion of one year of DV ACT, one conventional, conservative and politically correct channel had invited a group of DV ACT supporters and handful victims of wife centric laws who turned activists. I saw the way the programmed was biased against the victims and there was no equality of opportunity for expression. And as far as knack of clever misinterpretation was considered the feminist again won with edge as the victims were incapable to match them up and victims would not have preferred to stoop that low.

While the logical questions of family activists are ruled out by the feminists and termed as insecurity, they are turning on an obvious blind eye and deaf ear to their cries. The politicians must be quite and happy that the nuisance values have reduced and every Arjun will have a Renuka morally supporting her. But what about the common man? Who cares, ok what about common woman, the enquiry starts here that if the women has any issue as a wife then law is over sensitive else again who cares.

Insecurity is obvious, because we felt that 498a was nice and can never be misused on innocents, till we realized how dangerous it is. And hence we are apprehensive about DV Act misuse. Please note this point as these laws are like semi insulated live wires with open ends.

If 2 paragraphs of 498a can cause so much of misinterpretation then what can 6 pages draft which is already declared as loosely drafted by the honorable Delhi High court and Supreme Court do. The review has been a white wash where only the figures are taken in to consideration but not the draft that is already in to controversy openly supported by greedy people. My question is what is the harm in making this act fool proof?

Nobody is listening to the plea of innocents about the genuineness of the complaints; DV Act supporters are just talking about the numbers. And that is where the scary figures come in to the picture. What happened next is not discussed. It was the same case till the RTI was enforced on the year 2005, 498a figures and the results were shocking that a majority of complaints were motivated. And only 2% arguably true.

DV Misuse is already reported, to which the feminist brigade is very insensitive, and further the justification is given that ‘women are being oppressed since years and hence this is ok’. Which, in other words mean that the Act will be allowed to be misused. That means the innocents would be punished. Who cares about them? Then for whom are we fighting? The misusers?

And further I and my family never committed those atrocities then why we can’t get protection? So then lets go and rule the British now and lets have a jhalianwala there too? Because they did it to us? but will we get General Dyer who did this or we should catch the innocent people and punish them because they are british. Then Hitler was right in killing the jews (Sad). What logic is this? And it is sad to see the sadist pleasure that the feminist derive by seeing the innocents suffering as a justification.

Further in case of the DV Act misuse by a wife the mother in law is poorly told by the feminist that the son can be equally bad and may be he too wants the place divided like the daughter in law. Why this possibility is be ruled out that the family of the girl’s side is having a plan to get a part of the house. Why not?

Demanding money is a crime but if the wife demands the money, house etc (SOWRY) it is understood as justified though the law does not speak that way.

If the wife has taken the unlawful possession (Kabza) of the house that is in the name of the mother in law, under DV Act, then she should be 498a-ed because the definition of 498a includes point “b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.” Think about this. Let us not be victims to Legal quacks.

If the desperate argument by feminist is that mother in law has never earned then how come the house is in her name then the same argument is valid for the scrupulous daughter in law who has just moved in some months ago and how come the property becomes her? And further how can one stay under the same roof with legal abuse, verbal, physical and economic abuse. It would be so inhuman for the husband or wife in any case. Why is no one talking about the duties of the wife? Why just so called empowerment and freedom?

The intention is very clear that again in the name of sita, the surpanakhas would encash. And justification would be “well centuries ago they were suffering and abblah blah blah….” Real reformists should be concerned of the misuse happening and should also talk about the repercussion (for the provision) for a proved misuse. Otherwise, this trend of perpetuating an innocent family to walk in to a one way ticket trap will never end. The wife in rat race of getting a better flat than her peer sister would construct a situation where separation would be the obvious solution and then would come the blind and omnipotent DV ACT supported by pseudo paper statictics.

The wife who is preoccupied with winning the next argument with her innocent in-laws may meet up with a goof up and an accident in the kitchen and would die of her carelessness. But would leave the section 498a and 304b for the family as a parting gift, leaving with one more misleading false dowry case that would add up in the statistics. Similarly when a husband who is traveling, driving with tensions of a bad wife may too meet up with a fatal accident, but the end result won’t result in a default case rather his property now would be in the name of his wife and the darogaji (Police) would say that it was an accident and would leave the impression that so many husbands post marriage die but nobody leaves the suicide note. And in case of suicides by husbands the family of husband though aware cannot charge the wife, which in reverse is possible in India. That a wife who does not leave a suicide note still has her relatives to harass the innocent husband.

It was also said that 498a was a police affair so now we have introduced a civil act so then first tell us that are we scrapping 498a? No!! Rather the sword will now hang along with DVAct. Because the draft covers 498a too.

Equality to me is when there is equal treatment in all the areas “Equal Rights as well as Sentence.”

It would be a forced justification if a loosely drafted law would harass innocents, call them criminals and reflect them in statistics. This needs to be corrected, else it is a white wash.


Jinesh Zaveri.