This recent judgment of Madras HC (when do they plan to change the name to Chennai HC (?)) throws light on provisions of CrPC 160 under which police can call witnesses for investigation for any crime. CrPC 160 is reproduced below: Section 160 – Police Officer’s power to require attendance of witnesses 1. Any police officer making an investigation under this Chapter may, by order in writing, require the attendance before himself of any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining station who, from the information given or otherwise, appears to be acquainted with the facts …[Continue Reading]
Points on IPC 498A law, misuse, future PIL for Dowry Law Misuse etc.
Note: This article is being put in public domain and can be used by anyone in part or full for any purpose whatsoever. Given recent news about revisit by Supreme Court of prior SC judgment of 27th Jul in Rajesh Sharma vs. State of UP, it has become imperative for men’s rights organisations to come up with their own arguments and get directly involved with the legal and judicial processes about how laws, their interpretation, and implementation are modified by judicial orders. Even the revisit order by SC is based on a PIL by a women’s NGO comprising of women …[Continue Reading]
Summary of PIL filed in Delhi HC towards gender neutral rape/sexual assault laws
Full details of PIL are at along with PDF of the PIL is available below: https://www.republicindia.org/pil-filed-delhi-high-court-make-rape-laws-gender-neutral-protect-enforce-fundamental-rights-male-children-turning-18-yrs/ Prayer in the Writ Petition: To issue writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions, to declare Gender Specific Sections of IPC 375 & IPC 376 null, void and unconstitutional as per Article 13(2) of Indian Constitution as in current form IPC 375 & 376 are ultra-vires Articles 21 and 14 of Constitution of India, as after Right to Privacy Ruling where consent and bodily integrity of each citizen is now fundamental rights as a part of the …[Continue Reading]
Full text of ex-Google engineer James Damore’s memo
Recently a memo circulated internally within Google which talks about biological differences between men and women explaining some reasons behind their differing representation in technology work, among other things; had gone viral on social media. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-10/fired-google-engineer-says-company-execs-shamed-and-smeared-him The memo, which was leaked to the public over the weekend, argues that conservative viewpoints are suppressed at Google and that biological differences between men and women explain in part why so few women work in software engineering. Even if someone in Google management had agreed with some of the arguments put forth in his piece, they wouldn’t have felt safe speaking up, he …[Continue Reading]
SC 2017 guidelines on IPC 498A misuse: family welfare committees, designated IO, less arrests/more settlements, easier bail, recovery of articles, personal exemption to family members etc
Update 14/09/2018: The Rajesh Sharma judgment covered here has been reviewed by Supreme Court, and this article covers the salient points of judgment along with its full text. Update 13/10/2017: The judgment is now up for a revisit by SC (so soon!), and the reason for review is: “We can’t write law. We can only interpret the law.” SC To Revisit The Judgment By Two Judge Bench On Abuse Of Section 498A IPC [Read Petition] The women’s NGO (comprising of women advocates) which wanted a review of the judgment gave reasoning and statistics about how rural women benefit from IPC 498A and …[Continue Reading]
File RTIs to police for false cases’ prosecution under IPC 182
According to this recent news, Jaipur police had found over 4206 false/fake cases within one year alone in 2015-16. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/4206-fake-cases-filed-in-city-last-year/articleshow/56673897.cms JAIPUR: The Jaipur police have found that 4,206 fake caseswere reported in Jaipur between 2015-16. In most cases, a false complaint was filed with an aim to extort money or defame a person to settle personal scores. According to a senior police officer, these fake cases included allegations of harassment for dowry, molestation, cheating, and rape. These startling figures surfaces when Prafull Kumar, additional commissioner police (First) asked all DCP offices to provide details about cases where final report (FR) …[Continue Reading]
How to complain against judges of trial courts, High Courts, and Supreme Court?
This post is about how to complain against any judge be it trial courts, high courts, or supreme court in India. Right now it is being written with information collected from various places and based on personal experiences of people, and over time will have authoritative information. This post however does not cover about bad or unbecoming conduct of a judge outside of a court or trial scenario. Complain against judge cannot solely be because of a ‘bad’ judgment or order which has gone against you. Remember that in every interim order/final judgment one of the two opposing parties may …[Continue Reading]
Does Karnataka HC judgment allows for DV complaints on wives by husbands?
The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, or PWDVA, 2005 or DV Act in short, is very clear on one point. It is only for protection of women (practically speaking only wives use it) in a household. The name of the act itself makes it very clear. Update 28/04/2017: This order has been withdrawn, see end of post for screenshot from Karnataka HC website. Then this High Court of Karnataka judgment (text below) comes along, which seems to redefine the whole DV Act itself, by suggesting that a complaint filed by husband on wives and in-laws should be …[Continue Reading]
Allow DV complaints on females in household by removing requirement of “adult male” from definition of respondent – Supreme Court judgment
This judgment from Supreme Court in October 2016 changed PWDVA (Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act), 2005 in a fundamental way. Until this SC judgment, the DV Act allowed for complaint to be filed only against an adult male of the household, and whether other females could also be included as respondents along with adult male(s) was interpreted differently in different judgments, because the basic definition of word respondent included only adult males under Section 2(q) of the act. Basically the DV Act was created on behest of feminist lobby by roping in the beta males and virtue signalling …[Continue Reading]
25% (or 50%) of husband’s salary is justifiable maintenance, if you believe it
A recent judgment by Supreme Court has caused a minor earthquake in manosphere, since the same SC judgment was reported by a major newspaper with the headline that SC has set 25% of husband’s (net) salary as a benchmark amount of maintenance/alimony to wife. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/supreme-court-sets-alimony-benchmark-25-of-ex-husbands-net-salary/articleshow/58288399.cms It’s not just the youthful and “our opinion” papers like TOI, but even business papers have started reporting similar ‘benchmark’ type news, basically they are just doing copy-paste reporting from the first news written with a catchy headline: http://www.livemint.com/Politics/MGxqoOu55sw6VN7Jppo8EL/SC-sets-25-of-exhusbands-net-salary-as-benchmark-for-alim.html Immediately, those husbands who are having pending matrimonial litigation started re-calculating what damage this judgment can do …[Continue Reading]
- « Previous Page
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- …
- 45
- Next Page »
Recent Comments