Immoral Trafficking Act; Magistrate booked

Manish Sirhindi; Tribune News Service

Samalkha, August 27

A metropolitan magistrate, who was allegedly enjoying the hospitality of a call girl (alleged to be a minor) in a small rented room here last night, was rounded up by the police after neighbours informed it about the suspicious activities going on there.

After receiving a call from residents of the Punjabi Colony, the police raided the room that had been rented by Subhash Duhan and caught three persons and a girl there.

All accused were taken to the local police station. These included the metropolitan magistrate, a resident of Delhi; Subhash Duhan, son of Jeet Ram and resident of Sonepat; and Shamsher Singh, son of Surat Singh and resident of Bhiwani.

The police also rounded up the girl, who was alleged to be a minor and belonged to West Bengal.

It is learnt that the metropolitan magistrate was posted at the Tis Hazari Court complex in Delhi. He had come here in his Santro car that even had a name-plate highlighting his designation.

The Samalkha police registered an FIR against all accused, including the magistrate.

However, keeping in view the privileges enjoyed by a magistrate, he was not placed under arrest by the police. Samalkha DSP Wazir Singh Sheoran said the police had sought permission from the Delhi High Court to proceed against the magistrate.

He, however, refused to reveal whether the magistrate was being kept in police custody or had been let off.

Meanwhile, rumours were doing the rounds that the girl, along with whom the three persons had been rounded up, had been brought here by paying her Rs 20,000 a week and that she was a minor.

The police later took the girl along with the accused for medical examination to the Civil Hospital at the district headquarters to confirm whether she was a minor.

The report is yet to be received. She was at present putting up at Noida.

According to information gathered by The Tribune, the metropolitan magistrate was a friend of Subhash Duhan, who runs an NGO by the name of Lok Kalayan Foundation. Shamsher was said to a distant relative of Subhash. The NGO of Subhash runs computer centres and sewing training centres in the region.

The case against the accused was registered under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Immoral Trafficking Act of 1956.

Later, Subhash, Shamsher and the girl were produced before a local court, which sent them to 14-day judicial custody.

Source
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2009/20090828/haryana.htm#1

One more Indian beating “Indian men” for crimes against women !!!

Indian engineer develops online map to show horrors of gender abuse

26 Jan 2012 10:59

Source: trustlaw // Nita Bhalla

Screenshot of www.maps4aid.com

By Nita Bhalla

NEW DELHI (TrustLaw) – A villager in southwestern India has developed the country’s first online mapping platform that documents the multitude of abuses, rapes and murders committed daily against women there, to awaken people to the extent and horrors of such crimes.

Despite strong laws, girls and women in largely patriarchal India face a barrage of threats – including rape, dowry-related murder, forced marriage, domestic violence and human trafficking.

Construction engineer and former software developer Shemeer Padinzjharedil, 29, said he was shocked, and inspired, by a poll last year by the Thomson Reuters Foundation, which rated India as the fourth most dangerous place for women in the world.

“When I read the poll, I thought ‘Who are these people? They aren’t even from India. How can people from outside make such statements?’” Shemeer told TrustLaw by phone from his home in the village of Thiruvizhamkunnu, in the coastal state of Kerala.

“I was so angry and thought ‘I will prove them wrong.’ But after research, I found that it really is true. It’s just that the Indian media is not portraying it with as much seriousness.”

With a degree in civil engineering and years of experience working as a software developer in India’s IT hub of Bangalore, Shemeer used his skills to develop maps4aid (www.maps4aid.com) – a website mapping crimes by location and type.

The young man, who makes a living constructing houses in Kerala’s Palakkad district and helping his father farm, says the idea is not just about statistics, but also about exposing the horrific abuses Indian women endure.

“There are lots of news reports about crimes against women, but there really is nowhere where they are documented. The stories just get archived and the woman or girl just becomes a statistic, a number, that matters to no one,” he said.

“On maps4aid, not only do you see the statistic, but you can read the stories of the crime which really helps people understand the terrible things that happen to our women.”

GRUESOME CRIMES

According to U.N. Women, one third of Indian women aged between 15 and 49 years old have experienced physical violence and about one in 10 have experienced sexual violence.

Shemeer said he verifies and documents an average of nine cases every day and has so far mapped a total of 1,000 news reports since he started this as his pet project in September.

Headlines include “Female foetus stuffed in polythene bag,” “Court slaps life imprisonment on monster dad for raping daughter,” “Manhunt launched for youth who raped 2-year-old girl,” “Denied booze money, youth sets fire to mother,” “Woman poisoned to death by in-laws for dowry.”

Shemeer said the most common crime which he comes across is rape, with around 80 percent of the rapes being committed against minors. Women being harassed or murdered for dowry, by the family they married into, are the next most frequent crimes.

“I would say what I have mapped is just a small drop in the ocean,” he said, adding that most cases are not even reported due to the shame and stigma that victims fear even from their own families.

Shemeer, who was not really interested in women’s issues before, says it has been a huge learning curve but is glad to be doing something to raise awareness, even though he has few resources and has to run the platform from his village.

“For the Indian girl, it starts when she is in the womb where she risks being aborted. When she is born, they abuse and rape her. When she grows, they force her into marriage where she is harassed and possibly killed for dowry,” he said.

“When you look at the bigger picture, it’s a huge achievement for a girl in India to survive to adulthood at all.”

(Editing by Rebekah Curtis)

Source

http://www.trust.org/trustlaw/news/indian-engineer-develops-online-map-to-show-horrors-of-gender-abuse

Short of money for Lawyer fees ? Texas High court bringing “forms” for divorce

Texas High Court Moves Forward to Create Divorce Forms

Anna Whitney

January 26, 2012

Texas Tribune

Ignoring the State Bar of Texas’ suggestion to hold off, the Texas Supreme Court has decided not to suspend the work of task force charged with creating uniform forms for divorce.

In a letter today, Supreme Court Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson told State Bar President Bob Black that he planned to refer the divorce forms created by the high court’s task force to the Supreme Court Advisory Committee.

Last year, the Supreme Court created the Uniform Forms Task Force with the goal of making it easier for Texans who can’t afford lawyers’ fees to have access to the courts. Now, the task force has created divorce forms that, once approved by the Supreme Court, would be accepted in any Texas court.

But some lawyers who practice family law argue that the legal system is too complicated to be handled with just a form. And last week, the State Bar of Texas’ board of directors voted to urge the Supreme Court to stop the process.

But Jefferson said work on the forms would not stop. In the letter, he said he expects the court to receive the Advisory Committee’s recommendations in April and to review them in May.

Jefferson encouraged the State Bar to present recommendations for improving the forms. He told Black that the forms would be approved only if they are “substantively correct and reasonably calculated to accomplish the goal of greater access to the courts.”

Source

http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-texas-high-court-moves-forward-to-create-divorce-forms-story,0,1842149.story

வக்கீல் செலவுக்கு பணமில்லையா ? சுலப விவாகரத்துக்கு படிவங்கள் (divorce forms !!) தயார் !

===========================================
அமேரிக்க மாகாணமான டெக்சாசில் , கோர்ட்டு அனுமதியுடன், விவாகரத்துப் படிவங்கள் தயாராகின்றன . அமேரிக்க உச்ச நீதி மன்றம் இதை அனுமதித்தால், இவை சட்டமாகலாம். இதற்கு வக்கீல்கள் எதிர்ப்பு தெரிவித்துள்ளனர் !!!

“…Last year, the Supreme Court created the Uniform Forms Task Force with the goal of making it easier for Texans who can’t afford lawyers’ fees to have access to the courts.

Now, the task force has created divorce forms that, once approved by the Supreme Court, would be accepted in any Texas court…..”
============================================

http://www.the33tv.com/news/kdaf-texas-high-court-moves-forward-to-create-divorce-forms-story,0,1842149.story

புதுடெல்லி, ஜன.26-

பிரதமர் அலுவலகத்தில் சிறப்பு பணி அதிகாரியாக பணிபுரிவதாக கூறி ஏமாற்றிய கில்லாடி பெண் கைது செய்யப்பட்டார்.

அவர் பெயர் சுமங்கலி பிரான்சினா எஸ்தர் சார்லஸ் என்ற சுமன்சிங் (வயது 51).

ஐதராபாத்தை சேர்ந்த அவர், நேற்றுமுன்தினம் சென்னையில் இருந்து டெல்லிக்கு விமானத்தில் சென்றடைந்தபோது, கைது செய்யப்பட்டார்.

அவர், பிரதமர் அலுவலக அதிகாரி என்று சொல்லி பலரையும் வெற்றிகரமாக ஏமாற்றி உள்ளார். ஆனால், சிவில் விமான போக்குவரத்து டைரக்டர் ஜெனரல் பாரத் பூஷனிடம் ஆள் மாறாட்டம் செய்ய முயன்றபோது, அவர் சுமன்சிங்கின் மோசடியை கண்டுபிடித்தார். இதுபற்றி போலீசில் புகார் செய்தார். போலீசார் வழக்குப்பதிவு செய்து, ஒரு மாத விசாரணைக்கு பிறகு, சுமன்சிங்கை கைது செய்துள்ளனர்.

சுமன்சிங், ஏற்கனவே கடந்த 2003-ம் ஆண்டு அப்போதைய துணை பிரதமர் அத்வானியின் செயலாளர் என்று சொல்லி ஏமாற்றியதற்காகவும், கடந்த ஆண்டு ஐதராபாத்தில் இரண்டு தடவையும் கைது செய்யப்பட்டுள்ளார். ஆடம்பர பிரியையான இவர், இரண்டு திருமணங்கள் செய்தவர் ஆவார்.

http://www.dailythanthi.com/article.asp?NewsID=704464&disdate=1/26/2012

தலைமுடியை துண்டித்து சித்ரவதை; சென்னையில் பட்டதாரி பெண்ணின் கண்ணீர் கதை; கணவர், மாமனார், மாமியார் மீது வழக்குப்பதிவு

சென்னை, ஜன.25-

சென்னையில் பட்டதாரி பெண் ஒருவர் தனது கணவர் வீட்டார் செய்த கொடுமைகள் குறித்து கண்ணீர் புகார் கொடுத்துள்ளார். இதுதொடர்பாக அவரது கணவர் மற்றும் மாமனார், மாமியார் மீது வரதட்சணை ஒழிப்பு சட்டத்தின்கீழ் வழக்குப்பதிவு செய்து போலீசார் விசாரணை மேற்கொண்டுள்ளனர்.

காயத்ரி
===================
சென்னை அண்ணாநகர் 12-வது மெயின் ரோட்டைச் சேர்ந்தவர் பொன்பிரபா என்ற காயத்ரி (வயது 22). இவர் சென்னை போலீஸ் கமிஷனர் அலுவலகத்தில் புகார் மனு ஒன்றை கொடுத்தார். அந்த மனுவில் கூறி இருப்பதாவது:-

பட்டப்படிப்பு படித்துள்ள எனக்கு 7.9.2009 அன்று திருமணம் நடந்தது. எனது கணவர் பெயர் சீனுகணேஷ் என்பதாகும். திருமணத்தின்போது 75 சவரன் தங்கநகைகள், 10 கிலோ வெள்ளிப்பொருட்கள், ரூ.10 லட்சம் ரொக்கப்பணம் ஆகியவற்றை எனது பெற்றோர் வரதட்சணையாக கொடுத்தார்கள்.

முதல் இரவு அன்று எனது கணவர் என்னோடு தாம்பத்திய உறவு வைத்துக்கொள்ளவில்லை. 2 ஆண்டுகள் கழித்து தாம்பத்திய உறவு வைத்துக்கொள்வதாக அவர் கூறிவிட்டார்.

சொகுசு கார்
====================
இதுபற்றி எனது மாமியாரிடம் கேட்டபோது, ரூ.15 லட்சம் மதிப்புள்ள சொகுசு கார் வாங்கித்தந்தால்தான் எனது மகன் தாம்பத்திய உறவு வைத்துக்கொள்வான் என்று எனது மாமியார் கூறிவிட்டார். மேலும் நீளமான எனது தலைமுடியை வெட்டிவிட்டார்கள். எனது கணவர் நடத்தும் பேக்கரியில் என்னை வேலை செய்ய சொன்னார்கள்.

சமையல் அறையில் கியாசை திறந்துவிட்டு, என்னை கொல்ல பார்த்தார்கள். எனவே எனது கணவர் மீதும், அவரது குடும்பத்தினர் மீதும் சட்டபூர்வ நடவடிக்கை எடுக்க வேண்டுகிறேன்.

இவ்வாறு புகார் மனுவில் தெரிவிக்கப்பட்டது.

வழக்குப்பதிவு
=====================
இந்த புகார் மனு அண்ணாநகர் அனைத்து மகளிர் போலீஸ் நிலையத்துக்கு அனுப்பிவைக்கப்பட்டது. அண்ணாநகர் அனைத்து மகளிர் போலீசார் காயத்ரியின் கணவர் மற்றும் மாமனார், மாமியார் மீது வழக்குப்பதிவு செய்து விசாரணை நடத்தி வருகிறார்கள். காயத்ரியின் கணவர் மற்றும் மாமனார், மாமியார் தங்கள் மீதுள்ள குற்றத்தை மறுத்து கோர்ட்டில் முன்ஜாமீன் கேட்டுள்ளனர்

மூலம் :

http://www.dailythanthi.com/article.asp?NewsID=704262&disdate=1/25/2012&advt=2

1. கற்பு என்றால் என்ன ? அதுக்கு இலக்கணம் இருக்குதா ?
2. கணவனிடம் விவாகரத்து வாங்காமல், இன்னொருவனுடன் சேர்ந்து வாழ்ந்த பெண்ணுக்கு கற்பு உண்டா ?
3. அப்படி சேர்ந்து வாழ்ந்த ஆண் மேல் கற்பழிப்பு குற்றம் உண்டா ?

===============================================

இந்த மாதிரி ஏடாகூடமாய் யாருக்காவது சந்தேகம் வந்தால் அதை தீர்க்க, ஒரு செய்தி !!

===============================================

*2006* ஆம் ஆண்டு முதல் *சேர்ந்து வாழ்ந்த* ஆண் மீது கற்பழிப்பு குற்றச்சாட்டு

===============================================

BPO staffer held for ‘rape’ and cheating
Nitasha Natu, TNN | Jan 26, 2012, 02.08AM IST

MUMBAI: The Bangur Nagar police arrested a BPO employee on Tuesday after his former girlfriend accused him of rape and cheating. Officials said the accused, M Contractor (30), also allegedly took Rs 5 lakh from the victim on the pretext of starting a business, but did not repay the amount.

Contractor is a resident of Mira Road; the victim is nine years elder to him. The duo worked in the same BPO on Malad Link Road. The victim had separated from her husband and moved in with her parents in Goregaon (W). She has a five-year-old son and is yet to get a formal divorce.

“The two started having a relationship in 2006. The woman said he made false promises of marriage and got intimate with her a number of times. He also took money to start a business or on the pretext of ‘building a future for them’,” a senior police official said.

The victim then learnt that Contractor was getting married to some other girl. He also wouldn’t repay the money to her. On Tuesday, she lodged a police complaint. The accused has been remanded in police custody till January 30.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/BPO-staffer-held-for-rape-and-cheating/articleshow/11634027.cms

Gurgaon: BPO girl in credit card fraud

source :

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/Haryana/BPO-girl-in-credit-card-fraud/Article1-801790.aspx

அது சரி, அம்மா, அப்பா, அக்கா, அக்காவின் கணவன்னு கூண்டோட எல்லாரையும் ஏன் சார் கைது செய்றீங்க ?????

=================================================

அது சரி கைது செய்யாம விசாரிக்க முடியாதா போலீஸால ? அவங்க என்ன பில்லாவா, ரங்காவா ? இல்லை பின் லேடனா ?

சென்னை பெண்ணிடம் கூடுதல் வரதட்சணை கேட்டு சித்ரவதை
சாப்ட்வேர் என்ஜினீயர் உள்பட 4 பேர் கைது

=================================================

திருவொற்றிïர் ஜன.22-

சென்னையை சேர்ந்த பட்டதாரி பெண்ணை வரதட்சணை கேட்டு கொடுமைபடுத்தியதாக கணவர், மாமியார் உட்பட 4 பேர் கைது செய்யப்பட்டனர்.

பட்டதாரி பெண்
================
சென்னை, தண்டையார்பேட்டை, நேதாஜி நகரில் வசித்து வருபவர் ராஜன். இவரது மகள் பார்வதி (வயது 22) பி.எஸ்சி. பட்டதாரியான இவருக்கும் பெங்களூரில் சாப்ட்வேர் என்ஜினீயராக இருக்கும் ஓம்பிரகாஷ் (32) என்பவருக்கும் கடந்த 10 மாதங்களுக்கு முன்பு திருமணம் நடைபெற்றது.

திருமணமானதுமுதல் மனைவியை தண்டையார்பேட்டையில் உள்ள பெற்றோர் வீட்டில் விட்டுவிட்டு ஓம்பிரகாஷ் பெங்களூருக்கு சென்றுவிடுவது வழக்கம். தன்னையும் கூட்டிச்சென்று குடும்பம் நடத்துங்கள் என்று பார்வதி கேட்டபோது உங்கள் வீட்டில் மேலும் வரதட்சணை பணம் வாங்கிவா என்று ஓம்பிரகாஷ் தெரிவித்து உள்ளார். இதுபோல அவரது குடும்பத்தினரும் பார்வதியை கொடுமைபடுத்தியுள்ளனர்.

போலீசில் புகார்
================
இதனால் மனமுடைந்த பார்வதி கடந்த சில நாட்களுக்கு முன்பு சென்னை மாநகர போலீஸ் கமிஷனர் திரிபாதியிடம் புகார் செய்தார். அதில் தன்னை வரதட்சணை கேட்டு கணவர், மாமியார் மற்றும் குடும்பத்தினர் கொடுமைபடுத்துவதாக புகார் தெரிவித்திருந்தார். புகாரை பெற்றுக்கொண்ட போலீஸ் கமிஷனர் அதன் மீது நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கக்கோரி தண்டையார்பேட்டை போலீசாருக்கு உத்தரவிட்டார்.

இதனையடுத்து தண்டையார்பேட்டை போலீஸ் இன்ஸ்பெக்டர் ரமேஷ்பாபு வழக்கு பதிவு செய்து தனிப்படை அமைத்து பெங்களூருக்கு சென்று விசாரணை நடத்தினர். அப்போது பார்வதியை அவரது கணவர் திருமணம் செய்வதற்கு முன்பு அவருடன் வேலைபார்க்கும் சாப்ட்வேர் என்ஜினீயர் ஒருவரை காதலித்து வந்ததும், இவரது காதலை ஏற்க மறுத்த பெற்றோர் ஓம்பிரகாசுக்கு பார்வதியை திருமணம் செய்து வைத்ததும் தெரியவந்தது. மேலும் பார்வதியிடம் வரதட்சணை கேட்டு கொடுமைப்படுத்தியதும் தெரியவந்தது.

கைது
================
இதனையடுத்து போலீசார் ஓம்பிரகாஷ், அவரது அம்மா ரேவதி, அக்காள் சங்கீதா, அக்காள் கணவர் ரமேஷ் ஆகிய 4 பேரை கைது செய்து மேலும் விசாரித்து வருகின்றனர்.

http://www.dailythanthi.com/article.asp?NewsID=703592&disdate=1%2F22%2F2012&advt=2

As if one criminal case is NOT enough, this wife filed a second one !!

“……..the tendency and frequency of the wives of involving and roping in all the relations of her in-laws in the matter of demand of dowry have been tremendously increasing day by day, which is adversely affecting social fabric of the society and leaving the Courts in lurch to decide such criminal prosecution. This tendency needs to be curbed and if not discouraged, it is likely to affect and weaken the case of the prosecution even against the real culprits in future in this relevant direction……….”

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Davinder Singh & Ors. vs State Of Punjab & Anr. on 16 January, 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRM No.M-68462 of 2005

Date of Decision: 16.1.2012

Davinder Singh & Ors. …Petitioners Vs.

State of Punjab & Anr. …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

Present:- Mr.B.R.Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr.Palwinder Singh, Senior DAG Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr.Sarabjit Singh, Advocate for

Mr.Ashok Saini, Advocate for respondent No.2.

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J. (Oral)

The contour of the facts, culminating in the commencement, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that the marriage of Davinder Singh (petitioner No.1) son of Avtar Singh (petitioner No.2) was solemnized with complainant (respondent No.2) Paramjit Kaur daughter of Jagjit Singh on 23.9.1996, according to Sikh rites and ceremonies at Amritsar. After the solemnization of the marriage, they resided together, cohabited as husband and wife and a female child was born out of their wedlock on 27.3.1998.

2. According to the petitioners that immediately after one month of the marriage, the complainant started putting undue pressure on petitioner No.1, either to have a separate residence from his parents or to live as a Ghar Jawai in her parental house. Petitioner No.1 (husband) showed his inability to live separately from his parents on the ground that neither he was having any his own business nor a separate house to live. The husband and wife resided together till 1999. Ultimately, some dispute between the parties erupted and they parted their ways.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner-husband filed a divorce petition against the complainant-wife on 23.9.1999 for dissolution of their marriage under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter to be referred as “the Act”) on the ground of cruelty. It was claimed that as a counter blast to the divorce petition, the complainant-respondent No.2 lodged the present FIR, bearing No.45 dated 22.2.2000 (Annexure P1) against Davinder Singh petitioner No.1 (husband), Avtar Singh and Upkar Kaur-petitioner Nos.2 and 3 (parents-in-law), Harpreet Singh petitioner No.4 (brother-in-law) and Harpreet Kaur (since discharged) wife of Harpreet Singh (petitioner No.4), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 498-A, 406 IPC and sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in the Police Station Sadar, Amritsar, in which, they were accordingly charge-sheeted, by way of order dated 18.1.2001 (Annexure P2).

4. Aggrieved by the registration of a criminal case, the petitioners preferred the present petition, challenging the impugned FIR (Annexure P1), the order (Annexure P2) framing charges against them and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, invoking the provisions of section 482 Cr.PC, inter- alia on the ground that the lodging of FIR by the complainant is a counter blast to the divorce petition filed by petitioner No.1, they have been falsely implicated. In fact, the complainant-wife has treated them with cruelty and decree of divorce was passed in his (husband) favour, through the medium of judgment dated 28.1.2005 (Annexure P4). On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the petitioners sought to quash the impugned FIR (Annexure P1), order (Annexure P2) framing the charges against them and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, in the manner indicated hereinbefore.

5. The respondent-State refuted the prayer of the petitioners and filed the reply, taking certain preliminary objections of maintainability of the petition, cause of action and locus standi of the petitioners. The prosecution claimed that after the completion of the investigation, the final police report/challan has already been submitted against the petitioners. Instead of reproducing the entire contents of the reply and in order to avoid the repetition, suffice it to say that the State of Punjab has reiterated the allegations contained in the impugned FIR (Annexure P1). However, it will not be out of place to mention here that the State has stoutly denied all other allegations contained in the petition and prayed for its dismissal. It may be added here that the complainant-respondent No.2 did not file any reply to rebut the allegations as depicted in the petition.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the instant petition deserves to be accepted in this context.

7. As is evident from the record, that the marriage of Davinder Singh (petitioner No.1) was solemnized with complainant Paramjit Kaur (respondent No.2) on 23.9.1996, according to Sikh rites and ceremonies at Amritsar. After the solemnization of marriage, they resided together, cohabited as husband and wife and a female child was born out of their wedlock on 27.3.1998. The petitioners alleged that immediately after one month of the marriage, the complainant started putting undue pressure on petitioner No.1, either to have a separate residence from his parents or to live as a Ghar Jawai in her parental house. Petitioner No.1 projected his inability to live separately from his parents, because neither he was having any his own business nor a separate house to live. Some dispute between the parties erupted. Ultimately, the husband and wife resided together till 1999 and thereafter the separation ensued.

8. Sequelly, the petitioner-husband filed a divorce petition against the complainant-wife on 23.9.1999 for dissolution of their marriage under section 13 of the Act on the ground of cruelty. On 14.2.1999, the parents of the complainant alongwith other relations visited her matrimonial home and were stated to have given beatings to the petitioners and also a false case was got registered against them (petitioners) at the instance and under the pressure of Surinder Singh HC, co- brother of Joginder Singh, maternal uncle of complainant, vide FIR, bearing No.38 dated 15.2.1999 under sections 323 and 325 read with section 34 IPC.

9. What cannot possibly be disputed here is that after a prolonged agony of trial, the petitioners were ultimately acquitted in the earlier criminal case registered against them by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, by way of judgment dated 5.8.2005 (Annexure P5), which has already attained the finality. Admittedly, the petitioner-husband filed a divorce petition against the complainant-wife on 23.9.1999 and the present 2nd case was registered against the petitioners on 22.2.2000, by virtue of FIR (Annexure P1). This fact prima facie proves that the complainant has lodged the instant FIR as a counter blast to the divorce petition and to wreak vengeance of earlier acquittal of the petitioners.

10. Not only that, the petitioner-husband filed a divorce petition against the complainant-wife on 23.9.1999, inter-alia on the ground that she has treated him with cruelty. On the contrary, the complainant has lodged a criminal case on 22.2.2000 and has alleged in the FIR (Annexure P1) that she was treated with cruelty by the petitioners and their other co-accused Harpreet Kaur, in connection with and on account of demand of dowry. It is not a matter of dispute that disbelieving the allegations, the order framing the charges against Harpreet Kaur wife of Harpreet Singh (petitioner No.4), co-accused of the petitioners was quashed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (M.M.Aggarwal, J.), by way of order dated 4.10.2005 (Annexure P3).

11. Likewise, after taking into consideration the respective evidence of the parties, the matrimonial Court has recorded a finding of fact that the cause of estrangement between the parties was that the wife had been forcing the husband to live separately from his family members. She used to withdraw from his society because he did not agree to live separately from his family members as desired by her. The cause of dispute between the parties was not demand of dowry. It was also held that it was the wife, who used to torture the husband and compel him to reside separately and this conduct and behaviour of the wife amount to cruelty towards the husband on her part. She used to misbehave with her husband and had no regard for his parents and other family members as well. She was very head strong. It has been specifically concluded by the Matrimonial Court that “it is proved by very cogent and strong evidence that the respondent had been dealing with the petitioner and his parents with cruelty and she often used to leave her matrimonial home and despite efforts made by the petitioner, she failed to settle down in the family life. It is also proved that not only the respondent but also her parents had been using invectives of their choices to the petitioner and his parents and false complaints were made by them to the police and they were got harassed. As such, it is proved that the respondent treated the petitioner with cruelty and accordingly issue is decided in his favour.”

12. Consequently, the Matrimonial Court accepted the version of the husband, negatived the story set up by the wife, accepted the divorce petition filed by the husband and dissolved their marriage, by means of judgment & decree dated 28.1.2005 (Annexure P4).

13. The FAO, bearing No.114-M of 2005 filed by the complainant-wife has also been dismissed by this Court, through the medium of order dated 21.7.2006 (Annexure P6), which, in substance, is as under:- “The appellant-wife had filed the present appeal against the divorce decree passed in favour of the respondent-husband by the learned trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 28.1.2005. The respondent filed this application alleging that after passing of the divorce decree and before the filing of the appeal, the respondent had re-married with Gurpreet Kaur. Similarly, the appellant has also re-married with one Shabeg Singh on 21.1.2006. These facts have been admitted in the affidavit filed by the appellant that she has also re- married and the respondent has also re-married.

In view of the fact that the appellant has re-married with another person and respondent has also re-married with another girl, this application is accepted.

In these circumstances, the appeal is dismissed on merits and the divorce decree dated 28.1.2005 is upheld.”

14. As strange as it may appear but strictly speaking, the tendency and frequency of the wives of involving and roping in all the relations of her in-laws in the matter of demand of dowry have been tremendously increasing day by day, which is adversely affecting social fabric of the society and leaving the Courts in lurch to decide such criminal prosecution. This tendency needs to be curbed and if not discouraged, it is likely to affect and weaken the case of the prosecution even against the real culprits in future in this relevant direction.

15. An identical question came to be decided by this Court in Harjinder Kaur and others v. State of Punjab 2004(4) RCR(Criminal) 332; Labh Singh and others v. State of Haryana 2006(2) RCR (Criminal) 296; Mohinder Kaur & Others v. State of Punjab & Another 2010 (2) RCR(Criminal) 597; wherein it was ruled that “the allegations against the relatives of the husband were vague and there is growing tendency to come out with inflated and exaggerated allegations roping in each and every relation of the husband, things have now taken a reverse trend and the women are abusing beneficial provisions of section 498-A IPC.” The law laid down in the aforesaid judgments “mutatis mutandis” is applicable to the facts of this case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand. Therefore, to me, this petition deserves to be accepted, under the present set of circumstances.

16. Meaning thereby, if the crux of the material on record is clubbed together and is perused, then, the conclusion is inescapable that the allegations and the story set up by the complainant-wife in the FIR that the petitioners had treated her with cruelty in connection with and on account of demand of dowry, have already been disbelieved by the civil Court, by virtue of divorce decree (Annexure P4). The petitioners involved in another false criminal case by the relatives of the wife, were already acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, vide judgment (Annexure P5). Therefore, the argument of learned counsel for respondent-wife that the allegations contained in the FIR constitute an offence against the petitioners, pales into insignificance. On the contrary, there is a cogent material on record that the instant criminal case was registered against the petitioners maliciously or vexatiously in order to wreak vengeance. The marriage between the husband and wife stood dissolved, they have remarried and are now residing with their respective spouses. In that eventuality, to my mind, the continuation of criminal prosecution against the petitioners is nothing else, but sheer and deep misuse/abuse of process of criminal law in this relevant connection.

17. No other point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the counsel for the parties.

18. In the light of aforesaid reasons, the instant petition is accepted. Consequently, the impugned FIR (Annexure P1), order (Annexure P2) framing the charges against the petitioners and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed and the petitioners are discharged from the indicated criminal case registered against them.

(Mehinder Singh Sullar)

Judge

16.1.2012

AS

Whether to be referred to reporter ? Yes/No

Source :
indiankanoon.com