Monthly Archives: November 2005

Misuse of Indian Penal Code section 498A

“Misuse of Indian Penal Code section 498A”

Dear Sir/Madam,

Are you aware of a Section 498A of the Indian Penal code ?

This section has been a common cause of misery to many fellow Indians suffering alone. This section enables a WIFE to get her husband or aged in laws arrested WITHOUT inquiry !! The law which was meant to protect women from harassement, is NOW BEING MISUSED to arrest, harass and extract money from aged in laws (boy’s parents) and innocent Indian men. Perhaps India is the only country hosting such gender biased and un-fair law. We need to find a way to resolve this prominent issue facing our beloved country – India.

Beware!, a single false complaint by a DAUGHTER IN LAW /or your wife will keep your age old parents, kith and kin in prison on criminal grounds with out any investigation

Please spare couple of minutes of your valuble time. This is neither a spam nor are we looking for donations. Please read on……

In recent times Indian society had gone through tremondous change. Due to high financial and technological growth, western cultural influences and attitudes are being adopted in India. Marriages do not last for a 100 years. When marriages break due to mutual disharmony, un scrupulous women exploit the laws favouring them

Greed coupled with vengence his has lead to misuse of laws by some daughter-in-laws.

We would like to reach Indians across the world who care for an ethical society and proper laws. Biased laws need correction. We want you to put forward this message to reach victims of domestic disputes that you are aware of or any of your friends interested in making our society more promising for future generations. Men planning to get married also need to be aware of these GENDER BIASED LAWS.

Please join us to fight against this injustice.

“WE REQUEST YOU TO HELP US BY FORWARDING THIS MESSAGE TO ATLEAST 20 OF YOUR FRIENDS OF INDIAN ORIGIN”

Our special focus :

1. Equal rights to both genders.

2. Elimination of dowry.

3. Elimination of wife biased laws such as Section 498A of the Indian Penal code and Domestic Violence Act in its current form. We are not against DV Act but we believe in Domestic Harmony.

4. Section 498a of the Indian Penal Code -> This is really an evil law, where in may innocent husbands and in-laws are being victimized by false complaints by their daughter-in-law. This law should be re-written to bring it to civil lines. Provisions must be made to punish misuse and false complaints with no exceptions.

If you are a victim please write brief details to to saveindianfamily@yahoogroups.com and one of our volunteers would help you

alternatively post a comment here :

http://batteredmale.blogspot.com/

Advertisements

Will Someone For God’s Sake Marry Maureen?

Will Someone For God’s Sake Marry Maureen?

Maybe She’ll Shut Up

November 21, 2005

I read with ashen resignation that Maureen Dowd, the professional spinster of the New York Times, will soon birth a book, no doubt parthenogenetically, called Are Men Necessary? The problem apparently is that men have not found Maureen necessary. Hell hath…. Clearly there is something wrong with men.

I weary of the self-absorbed clucking of aging poultry.

Why is Maureen hermetically single? For starters, she is not just now your classic hot ticket. She’s not just over the hill, but into the mountains, to Grandmother’s house we go. She probably gets more daily maintenance than a 747, but she still looks as though a vocational school held an injection-molding contest and everyone lost. That leaves her with only her personality as bait. The prognosis is grim.

Was that ungentlemanly? She makes a career of being disagreeable about men. What’s sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose, say I.

Reading her unending plaints, one concludes that she is deeply in love—with herself, and too loyal ever to cheat with a man. Behind her writing you always hear the little voice, “I’m so wonderful, so elite…why doesn’t somebody marry me?? (Well, Maureen, I can give you a few ideas. You’re a pain in the ass….) “I’m so smart, I’m so powerful, I’m so, sooo elite, so talented, so…special.? As, in their way, are ingrown toenails. “I’m successful, shriek. Men hate me because I’m smart. They feel threatened because I’m so wonderful.?

Actually, Maureen, you are no more threatening, or appealing, than somebody else’s gym socks. I suspect that men don’t like you because you aren’t likeable.

Now, precisely why are you so wonderful? Clearly you aren’t stupid. You are a competent if sophomoric writer. Dummies can’t do that. But I’ll tell you what, Sweet Potato: I don’t think I know anyone who would want to go out with you. As best I can tell, should you have an original thought, it would need counseling, for depression and loneliness.

Smart women are an attraction of Washington, at least the parts off the cocktail circuit. They made fifteen years in that wretched city bearable for me. I knew women with serious brains, golden-girl biochemists at NIH, a gal who ran a federal positron-emission tomography lab, weirded-out computer techs, startlingly good writers and chicks who had popped scores you wouldn’t believe on tests at NSA that aren’t supposed to exist. They’d eat you for lunch, Maureen.

Now, I know that people at the New York Times have ample self-esteem, and indeed come coated with it to a depth of inches. How about we have a little understanding here. In journalism as in politics, advancement has little to do with merit. Have you checked the contents of the White House lately? Dan Rather and Connie Chung are pinnacles of anything at all? I’ve been around this game as long as you have and I know how the scam works. Getting to the upper ranks of journalism is a matter of luck, sexual sharing, brown-nosing, and staying carefully within the bounds of the regnant politics of the newsroom.

You are journalistic glitter, Maureen—Reporter Barbie, a literary Streisand. While working for the Times is perhaps nothing to be ashamed of, I’d keep quiet about it.

Maureen’s agonizing does however provide exegesis of the American female mind at a curious moment. Again and again their question seems to be, what form of pretense is needed to achieve marriage? Must I feign sex-kittenhood? Be a calculated suck-up who always laughs at his jokes? Hide my brains? The underlying idea is that they must commit some fraud to attract a man. This of course implies that they aren’t attractive without committing fraud.

I’ll give them that.

Those of us who have wives from Mexico, Thailand, the Philippines, Chile, or China view Maureen as being a very strange creature indeed, perhaps expelled from a geothermal vent. (“Hi! I’m Fred. What’s your phylum??) Like Maureen, so many gringas don’t seem to know who they are, what they are, what they want to be, or how to get there. I think of a tinkertoy construction made by an insane two-year-old: a lot of protruding parts that don’t fit together.

By contrast foreign women are psychologically coherent. They are sexy because they are women and like being sexy, not as a Vaudeville act or marketing tool. Resentment is not their primary emotion. They love their children and regard raising them as a pleasure, not an imposition of which they are ashamed.

If you read Maureen and her littermates, you realize that they are those most uncomfortable of women, heterosexual man-haters. For example, Maureen, from her new book:

“Men, apparently, learn early to protect their eggshell egos from high-achieving women. The girls said they hid the fact that they went to Harvard from guys they met because it was the kiss of death.?

Who would marry that? Yet it is classic Maureen, snotty, catty, hostile. As for her own Kevlar ego, there’s this, from her interview with Howard Kurtz:

“Even after a decade of writing a New York Times column, she admits to being ‘very thin-skinned’ about criticism. ‘I’m just not temperamentally suited to it,’ Dowd says. ‘The first couple of years I spent curled up on the floor and crying.’?

Oh.

The drumbeat of animosity is never missing from her hetero-anguished feminism. Men are vain, frightened, immature, unreliable, treacherous, fascinated by gewgaws, obsessed with sex, and unfaithful. Several questions arise. If men are so bad, why does Maureen want one? What kind of men has she been running around with? Those closely resembling herself, it sounds as if. Most to the point, why would any man want anything to do with such a woman?

This confusion and hostility has made the American woman into an internationally acclaimed shrew. Yes, there are degrees, and perhaps more exceptions than examples, but talk to white men from Washington to Hong Kong and you see the same shudder.

These gals are wound too tight. Recently I was aboard a highway bus in an American enclave in Mexico. A gringa wanted to get off where there was no stop. The driver didn’t understand her. In Mexico they speak Spanish, a point which apparently had eluded her. She began yelling at him abusively. (Verbatim quote: “You’re the worst! You suck! You’re the worst!?)

They do this. People notice. A friend somehow found himself talking with a gringa who had one of those puffy little white dogs you could buff a truck with. He said, “Cute little thing. I’ve got a real dog.? This mild witticism set her into yelling.

Par.

Howard Kurtz, Washington Post, Saturday, November 5, 2005

 

NCW and 498A…

http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=82654

NCW says no to dilution of anti-dowry law

AASHA KHOSA

Posted online: Friday, November 25, 2005 at 0308 hours IST

NEW DELHI, NOVEMBER 24: The National Commission for Women (NCW) and womens’ groups have again rejected suggestions to dilute the anti-dowry law, saying it would be an insult to thousands of women who are killed by greedy in-laws.

So looks like the commission is worried about DOWRY DEATH. One has to be worried about dowry death. But as you read further, you begin to doubt what the commission is really worried about ?

The Commission, which kicked off consultations for reviewing the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, rather asserted that the law needs to be made more stringent.

Justice Malimath in his report on review of the criminal justice system had suggested that Section 498A be made bailable and non-compoundable as it was being misused too.

‘‘Demands are made from the woman’s family by in-laws for years after the marriage and this does not constitute dowry under existing laws,’’ NCW chairperson Girija Vyas said.

Aha !! that is interesting. So as per Shrimati Girija Vyas demands made some years after marriage ARE NOT DOWRY ??. That seems very interesting. My wife filed a 498A against my parents approx 4 years after marriage ? was that totally illegal ?? 🙂

‘‘For this reason the NCW wants that the very definition of dowry be widened.’’

Other feel it is wide enough even now ?

The consultations were attended by chairpersons of all the state women commissions, directors-general of police, and NGOs engaged in ensuring women their rights.

‘‘The meeting rejected, in one voice, the suggestion to make bride-burning a bailable and non-compoundable crime,’’ Vyas told the Express. ‘‘In fact, we are doubly sure now that Section 498A is the only weapon to avenge the killing of women for dowry.’’

Now…. Now…. Now…
Shrimati Vyas is confusing us
Dowry death is covered under section 304B of the India Penal code and not under section 498A. Section 498A deals with cruelty, the nebulous term that is often used to arrest INNOCENT Elderly women by Daughter(s) In Law who are very much alive and comes around asking for a ransom!!
I’m sure Shrimati Vyas is astute enough to understand this difference between 304B and 498A. ONLY that she has shocked us with the words DOWRY DEATH, and is trying to use the sympathy & keep section 498A alive !!
If they are really worried about DEATH, they should be strengthening 304B ?? aint it ??

Speakers at the meeting said, ‘‘Which law is immune to being misused, and why target a pro-women legislation?’’

So … looks like Shrimathi Vyas is aware of the fact that THIS LAW IS ALSO MISUED !! AHA ! THATS A GREAT ADMITTAL

However, Vyas said the government could streamline the implementation of dowry laws to minimise misuse. Vyas said that even today, ‘‘the bulk of criminal cases pertaining to women are about dowry’’.

Now… Now.. Now.. we are in agrement Madam. YES. The bulk of the cases pertain to dowry. yes. The conviction rate on criminal cases is 2% so a bulk of (98% ) of these cases are FALSE !!

The key points raised at the meeting:

• Massive overhauling of anti-dowry laws to address to the changing times where greedy in-laws have found new ways to circumvent existing laws

What about the Greedy Daughter in Laws, misusing the law ? what about an overhaul for that ?

• Members of legislatures, and public servants should be made to sign a mandatory declaration that they have not asked for dowry at the time of their of children’s marriage

Thanks. That might save some of them from false dowry cases later

• Men and women holding public offices should conduct marriages without vulgar display of wealth

• A woman who has slapped charges of dowry harassment on her in-laws should be free to go to court where her parents reside

aha !! I thought that Madam Vyas was worried about Dowry Death. Dead women don’t go to court … or do they ? so In effect it is about the greedy Daughter in Law trying to file false cases and also dragging the poor husband and family “..to the place where her parents are living …” ?? ain’t it ?

• Strict guidelines should be issued to the police for investigation cases of dowry deaths on the lines of one existing for custodial deaths.

Now again back to deaths..
bottomline : we are talking about deaths the shocking death you dumb male, we are … talking about the dead daughter in law, the missing poor woman who filed 498A er… against her in laws and went to her father’s house IN THIS WORLD… and want’s the mother in law arrested …. long live womens lib !! …

http://o3.indiatimes.com/Vinayak/
http://batteredmale.blogspot.com/
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-Y2MTaSA0RLDVTunp3KQgKh0-
http://my2cents.rediffblogs.com/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/Vinayak123/

Feminine view on sex is forbidden

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/msid-1298218,curpg-1.cms

Feminine view on sex is forbidden

SWATI DAS

[ Thursday, November 17, 2005 01:49:51 am TIMES NEWS NETWORK ]

CHENNAI: Don’t speak the truth in Chennai. And don’t behave like you are living in a 21st century Indian metro. Movie star Khushboo did that and is now paying a heavy and heart-rending price for it.

And just what did the actor do? She said, rather innocuously, that men should no more expect their brides to be virgins. She also said that when youngsters indulge in premarital sex, they should use protection.

Anywhere else, Khushboo would have been called an anti-AIDS spokesperson and perhaps even feted but not Tamil Nadu with its insular politics and blinkered politicians.

It was almost as if the state was being guided by some Taliban-type morality inspectors. Police have in recent weeks closed a star hotel after local papers published pictures of a private party where couples were seen kissing and hauled up other couples just walking in parks.

While the police are cracking down on citizens, men in the political and cultural spaces have been drawing lakshman rekhas for women.

Over a year ago, a few women poets were lambasted by their male colleagues for writing about women’s sexuality. One said these women should be slapped!

As for Khushboo — there was a PIL complaining she was corrupting innocence. At last count there were 25 defamation cases against her. In fact, charges seem to have been erroneously slapped against her and the court’s impartiality is being debated.

“Chenglepet and Villupuram magistrates dismissed the cases against Khushboo. Probably, the Mettur case was not dismissed because the complainant was a PMK lawyer, A Murugan. The Mettur case was filed under wrong sections.

Criminal defamation and obscenity does not apply in her case,” said K Chandru, a senior lawyer. As courts and police hounded Khushboo, few in Tamil Nadu appear to be ready to defend her.

Another actor, director Mani Ratnam’s wife Suhasini, who apologised to Khushboo on behalf of the Tamil people, had to eat her words and under tremendous pressure apologise to Chennai’s filmdom instead.

An exception, PUCL leader Sudha Ramalingam said, “It never becomes an issue when men speak on sex. But when women speak their mind there is chaos.”

Another feeble resistance came from ‘Saner Chennai’ of lawyer P V S Giridhar. “We had taken up three issues when we started — dress code in colleges, backlash on Khushboo and the Park Hotel incident. Did you know that in Sathyabhama College, girls and boys are not allowed to talk to each other?” Giridhar said.

The Congress didn’t show much spine either. Jayanti Natarajan, a party leader, merely said that people have a right to express their views “but it is unfortunate that it (Khushboo’s statement) hurt a section of people,” The media too has largely been silent.

No one wants to be seen as too forward and defending the actor against political parties. Both Khushboo and Suhasini found little help from the industry.

Officially, though, South Indian Film Artists Association general secretary R Sarathkumar, who said Khusboo had hurt public sentiment by saying men should not expect virgin wives, denied the actresses were out in the cold.

Since cinema and politics are so closely linked here,E V Ramaswamy Periyar had equated chastity to enslavement of women when the Dravidian movement or Tamil nationalism began.

Today, two parties, Patali Makkal Katchi (PMK) and Dalit Panthers of India (DPI) are equating chastity to Tamilhood and resorting to witch hunting. Actors Khushboo and Suhasini are easy targets, given the moral reputation attached to the film industry.

“I do not believe Khushboo has transgressed any law,” said Rajya Sabha member and political analyst Cho S Ramaswamy. But dubious agenda-laden netas don’t think so and the TNT _ Tamil Nadu Taliban _ is happy to blast away voices of reason in the state.

Kushboo’s original comments

I’ve blogged Kushboo’s original comments in Tamil. You can see them on the following URL

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-Y2MTaSA0RLDVTunp3KQgKh0-?p=78
http://www.livejournal.com/users/e_vinayak/1959.html
http://batteredmale.blogspot.com/2005/11/kushboo-interview-from-india-today-sex.html

A free translation with no recourse follows. If there are other Tamils, you are welcome to provide alternate / better translations. This translation may also be blogged / posted with some credit to me… but with no copyrights.. :

========= start kushboo’s comments with some notes from me ==========

*From Sep 28 2005 India Today*

“Kushboo : ..Chennai *was* behind Bangalore with regard to women expressing sexual matters ….”
(Note : I’ve used “matters” here as her Tamil word does not exactly translate to desires).

Kushboo : “…..Now women in Chennai are also crossing these mental taboos on sexual matters. We get to see a lot of women (girls? ) in Pubs and discos (at Chennai). (These days) Women can talk freely on matters regarding sex. Slowly the woman is opening her wings and has started flying out in this restricted society. Still, accidents to women like Stephany raises some questions about how healthy this trend is?. Sex education is very essential in schools. Even if sex education is not provided in schools, parents have to teach their children about sex…..”

Kushboo : “…For me sex is not just a physical thing. Its mental too. I can’t understand how women can change their boy friends every week…”
(Note : Kushboo says that she can’t accept this habit of changing boy friends per week…. NOT that this does NOT happen !!. That means there are many girls who have weekly boyfriends and Kushboo who is aware of pubs and discos must have a good overview of this.
Note : Its quite possible that after a few years, meaning 52 x 4 = 208 boyfriends when these new age women get married, they would get rather tired of men and soon seek the 498A route :-()

Kushboo : “….If a girl is going strong with her boyfriend, she can go out with him after informing her parents…”
(Note : No issue of seeking permission here. I’ve carefully read the Tamil word / words. It just says inform. Not seek permission)

Kushboo : “…If a girl has a Strong relationship, the parents have to allow that….”
Note : all about relationships BEFORE marriage. Social acceptance of the same etc… and then comes the clincher)

Kushboo : “…Our society has to be liberated from thoughts like “a woman has to be a virgin at the time of marriage”. No educated man would expect his wife to be a virgin. However, women have to safeguard themselves from pregnancy or other disease, while having pre – marital sex…..”
Note : So the issues are just physiological and economic at the maximum. don’t get pregnant before marriage and don’t be left holding the baby !!. The issue is NOT about chastity..

Kushboo : “…I married the man I was in love with. Since we were sure about our relationships, we had sex before marriage. Its now six years since marriage. Since we have two children, our responsibilities have grown. Since the children sleep in the same room as we do we need to find other private times (/moments) for us. Still we have a happy married life. Married people should know how to satisfy their spouse’s physical needs. There would be no problems, if desires are understood mutually. …”
(Note : She has had pre marital sex. She says she married the same person. She was an actress BEFORE she was married.)

Kushboo : “…Some increase gratification by using sex books, photos etc. One cannot say that is wrong. At the same time At the same time, one should understand the other’s likes, dislikes and comforts, discomforts. Men who mistake women talking about sex should change their views. Mutual consent is essential for sex. …”
(Note : Last para is some general whitewash .. The whole interview speaks tons about pre marital sex, sex between partners, safe sex and so on. At one point she cautions women *not* to get pregnant by Pre marital sex !!)

========= end of Translation and comments =================


http://batteredmale.blogspot.com/
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-Y2MTaSA0RLDVTunp3KQgKh0-
http://my2cents.rediffblogs.com/
http://spaces.msn.com/members/Vinayak123/

http://s2.phpbbforfree.com/forums/dowry-forum-1.html
http://phpbb-host.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=2&mforum=dowry

http://groups.google.com/group/DLMI?lnk=li
http://groups.google.com/group/DivorceCases?lnk=li
http://groups.google.com/group/DivorceFAQ?lnk=li