Pati Patni aur Parents ya Police?
Post counseling I have certain standard questions that I ask to all victims, For a false 498a-ed, I do not miss asking the day of arrest as Friday (still happening). That there has to be a god motherly figure for the girl to have instigated the threat or 498a or DV in reality.
I ask my female acquaintances who are bold enough to discuss with me the state of affairs, given the fact that I am not pro feminist anymore, they tell me one thing in common and that is, they always knew that laws were there in their favor. And the boys when I ask them that were they aware of the laws? And all of them almost sound similar in replying me that had they been aware they would have never got married at the first place. The truth is most of them are Ignorant. They also say that “I never indulged in dowry etc so I thought I was safe, and all accused were guilty….etc ”
Pati Patni aur Police...
Since long I had thought of this post but could not blog, this time I finally thought that I will write as I witnessed one more case where between Pati and Patni came Police and the damage was done. Distances were created and things never got restored.
This time I have heard the girls side and my analysis as an activist is that again the law needs to blamed more than anything else. Why? Well after dispute or during dispute whenever there is a mention of the law or police the guy gets really conscious of the intentions of the girl, he may be wrong in judging, but his conviction of being victimized remains perturbed given the data of misuse and understanding of the omnipotent anti male laws, in case if he commits so called crime as per the interpretations of his wife and awareness of law. The so called winner girl protected by law lands up losing the family.
Take cases where a dispute lands up in to police in terms of a complain by the girl or a conscious consultation from the warned boy. (With either of both landing up to the chowki), the police explains the law to the guy and then comes the phase of the guy to be legally insecure. And first thing would be, he will lose all his possessiveness on his wife as that could be misinterpreted, and also mentally disown her as a side effect, thinking of his parents being vulnerable to be arrested even on a statement, he would definitely think of safeguarding himself and avoid 3rd party nuisance.
So what should be ideal, wait dear feminists I too would be concerned if my sister was in that position, but this is how it should be dealt, it should be Pati Patni and Parents, now the dispute with a modern girl is parents of the guy (refer 7 vows of hindu marriage). So it is legal to think of parents in the dispute that has blown out of proportions.
Now Execution of Pati Patni aur Parents:
Parents of both sides should be consulted. Now the parents of guy should behave as if they are girls’ parents. Parents of the bride should behave and represent the grooms case, and then just imagine the bonding. (whooh, I remember myself being confronted by 3 people during disputes and at times even 5, that is to say my other half supported by my parents and also by my brother and bhabhi if they were present and me rendered all alone but enjoying the sight of their unity, ahhh what an incentive. But alas!!!!).
For those who are not privileged enough to have their parents living with them and unfortunately if police comes in the picture, I feel there should be a constructive action by the police rather than punishment or warning, they should refer the couple to compulsive counseling sessions without arrogance rather than taking sides, so that there is no embarrassment to either of the parties at any stage. This point should be noted by the police.
Else the relation will face the fate of bears who scared brownielocks at their very site. Where as bears desired to adopt the girl but girl got scared and ran away thinking she would be harmed. Here the guys family is like brownielocks and the police are the bears who terrorise and jeoparadise the relationship. And more so if the definition of the law is examined and loopholes understood, I bet no one would get married under Indian law as told to be by so many guys and those on the side of the groom. With this the relationship falls with finally both sides losing like Humpty Dumpty, who could not be put together again after a great fall.
So it is better to have Pati Patni and Parents rather than police. Its better to have Domestic Harmony and constructive counseling rather than punishments. Isn't it?
Ideally,
Jinesh Zaveri.
posted by IndianHusbands | 9:59 PM
4 Comments:
Hi, I am married for last 4.6 yrs now and in Dec-07 my wife (M, d/o K) was suspected preg.
Unfortunately due to some quarrell she left my house and har parents puicked her up from the society gate and didnt bother to come to me asking wat happened. Actually its their habbit that whenever there is a small quarrel her paretns take her back to their house and then stop communication, which has case instability
in our relationship and i also doubt now that she might be having
some affair or used me for only sex & getting pregnant.
Now its been 3.5 months that she is confirmed pregnant and we have attempted several times to call her back but she is not coming. earlier she said she wants divorce and baort the baby if she was made to come back. but recently she said she wants to stay at her paretns house
because of care during preg. but am confused. her paretns are also
not making any attempt to send her back or talk to us. in fact she
never calls me from her house on ph.now am confused wat lies in
future.if I dont communicate, or dont interact, they start threatening our relatives that they will file a notioce or dowry case against us. But when ever we approach them, they start delaying the meeting. This time they only called us because of some test the doctor asked them to get done from me, and they themselves said" if it was not required we would not have called you". we alos have got threats from NGO & Police (though both not written complaints in respective offices).
wat shall we do to avoid any legal issue on us.I have also lost the charm of being a father and dont want to see the baby also which created a chaos in my life.
Another classical example of the gross misuse of Dowry Act (498A) is the case of television celebrity, Suhaib Ilyasi. India's Most Wanted television host was in controversy after the dispute over his daughter Aaliya's custody rose soon after Ilyasi's wife Anju committed suicide on January 10, 2000 in Delhi. While his mother–in-law, Rukma Singh wanted custody of the child on the ground that she had the right under Muslim law, Ilyasi had taken the plea that his marriage with Anju was not solemnized as per the Muslim law but had been a civil affair. His sister-in-law Rashmi Singh came from Canada after six months of her sister's death and filed a complaint with the police against Ilyasi, alleging that he used to torture his wife Anju for dowry.
The case took bizarre turn when Anju's brother Prashant Singh and father Prof K P Singh took a diametrically opposite stand and described the allegations against Ilyasi as ``rubbish.'' Prashant told Express Newsline:`whatever my mother and sister Rashmi are stating against Suhaib Ilyasi is a lot of rubbish. There is no truth in their statement or in the charges filed by the police against Suhaib. If you are holding Suhaib responsible for Anju's suicide, then my mother and sister are also to blame, as they unduly interfered in their family matters.
K P Singh, a retired IIT professor, agreed with Prashant. “My wife and daughter are breaking up my family”. Both Anju's father and brother allege that Rukma and Rashmi have given statements against Suhaib as `they wanted custody of baby Aaliya. When Ilyasi delayed that, they put him in trouble.'
Anju's mother Rukma Singh had changed her earlier statement given in January, 2000, in which she had stated that she did not suspect any foul play by Suhaib Ilyasi. However when Ilyasi refused to give custody of his daughter, she change her statement and alleged dowry harassment against Ilyasi.
It has been alleged for long that Dowry Act (498a) in India is being consistently misused by clever women for extortion and blackmailing. The NCRB records suggest that during 2005-2006, 94% of the 498A, 304B cases filed by women or by her relatives were primarily to settle scores.
Section 498A in itself is, however, not meant to deal specifically with dowry -- it is commonly considered to be a 'dowry law' because domestic violence against a wife related to dowry demands is considered to be within the scope of 'cruelty' envisaged by the Section.
Another classical example of the gross misuse of Dowry Act (498A) is the case of television celebrity, Suhaib Ilyasi. India's Most Wanted television host was in controversy after the dispute over his daughter Aaliya's custody rose soon after Ilyasi's wife Anju committed suicide on January 10, 2000 in Delhi. While his mother–in-law, Rukma Singh wanted custody of the child on the ground that she had the right under Muslim law, Ilyasi had taken the plea that his marriage with Anju was not solemnized as per the Muslim law but had been a civil affair. His sister-in-law Rashmi Singh came from Canada after six months of her sister's death and filed a complaint with the police against Ilyasi, alleging that he used to torture his wife Anju for dowry.
The case took bizarre turn when Anju's brother Prashant Singh and father Prof K P Singh took a diametrically opposite stand and described the allegations against Ilyasi as ``rubbish.'' Prashant told Express Newsline:`whatever my mother and sister Rashmi are stating against Suhaib Ilyasi is a lot of rubbish. There is no truth in their statement or in the charges filed by the police against Suhaib. If you are holding Suhaib responsible for Anju's suicide, then my mother and sister are also to blame, as they unduly interfered in their family matters.
K P Singh, a retired IIT professor, agreed with Prashant. “My wife and daughter are breaking up my family”. Both Anju's father and brother allege that Rukma and Rashmi have given statements against Suhaib as `they wanted custody of baby Aaliya. When Ilyasi delayed that, they put him in trouble.'
Anju's mother Rukma Singh had changed her earlier statement given in January, 2000, in which she had stated that she did not suspect any foul play by Suhaib Ilyasi. However when Ilyasi refused to give custody of his daughter, she change her statement and alleged dowry harassment against Ilyasi.
It has been alleged for long that Dowry Act (498a) in India is being consistently misused by clever women for extortion and blackmailing. The NCRB records suggest that during 2005-2006, 94% of the 498A, 304B cases filed by women or by her relatives were primarily to settle scores.
Section 498A in itself is, however, not meant to deal specifically with dowry -- it is commonly considered to be a 'dowry law' because domestic violence against a wife related to dowry demands is considered to be within the scope of 'cruelty' envisaged by the Section.
main bhi dahej partha ke khilaf our maine kasam bhi khyi h . jinesh g plz hamara sahyog karo
Post a Comment
<< Home