Sunday, September 25, 2005

shurpannnitas Demand dismissed

Justice Lakhshaman Panchvatikar today disposed of a petition filed shurpannita against Raman and Sitala asking for relief that as per section 498-S of DV bill which states that every husband and his relatives be made to accede to Girl Friends demand for ilegal demand for adultory , money and whatever else
The advocates for Petioners Indira Victor Singh assited by Neha argued that according to Section 498-S drafted by her that Raman had no choice but to acceede to the ilegal demand for Adultary Made by Shurpannita . That it Formed the whole basis for the Secion 498-S AKA Domestic Violence Bill. Failing this Raman has to provide his Panch kutir to Shurpannita. She furhtur argued that Shurpannita had asked for 3 engagement rings for marriage but raman had failed to it and hence is guilty vide Section 498-S for economical abuse . Which clearly upholds the right of a women to make ilegal demands for adultary and whoever resists such demands should be shown what womens law is all about. Indira Victor Singh Furthur argued that Ram had shown no interest in any kind of relation-ship hence this contributes to Mental and Emotional abuse of shurpannita.Indira Victor Singh furthur Charged that Sita was taking the side of Raman and it is proved when she came to Nasik from Ayodhya Clearly violating the code of Ethics that a women should persue Lifestyle and harass a husband for Sowry failing which in case of umemployment or any other reason she should file a section 498a case because lack of lifestyle can make a real modern women suicidal and claim economic violence. Hence by not running after Lifestyle Sitala has set a bad example to modern women.

The Respondent Advocates Swaroop Sarkar assisted by Gorky argued that "Crime is crime irespective of gender " and The right to make an ilegal demand of Adultary and benefits out of it cannot stand in any principle of of Natural justice. The refusal to give 3 rings for engagement can not be termed as economic Violence except by indira victor singh.

Justice Lakshman Panchvatikar Dismissed the Petition of shuprannita Section 498-S is an ultra virus namely that even ilegal adultary can not form any basis of making claims forget about a demand for ilegal adultery.

Shurpannita was reported to have said after this " Meri Nak kat Gayi" and complained to women's rights activist Ravan

Ravan has threatened to abduct Sitala and is reported to have local goon Marichakumar.

In another Related cases the suite for Declaration filed by Kaaikeyi was dismissed after 14 years that Dashratha should give SOWRY of ayodhya to her . In a seven judge bench The Sapta Rishi ruled that SOWRY harassment of Dashratha was not a Legal Demand and is not PArt of Section 498-S. Burundi Carrot had argued that a SOWRY is a Streedhan while D'souza & Courage-Blue Argued on Bahalf of Raman that every person has the right to a lifestyle to which the Person was capable of and nobody should be made to support anothers life style

In another Case fought by Indira Victor Singh for the RCR by Ahilya against Gautam . Ahilya has placed objected to being considered Adulterous on grounds that the adulteror looks like a clone of Gautama and hence she was misled . In fact she charged that Gautam was treating her as if she was a rock rather then a wife after she was found with a person who looked like Gautam . Privately ahilya admitted it was a very thin defence but she is banking on the Gender Sensitivety training conducted by Indira Victor singh to let her sail through confertably and turn the tables against Gautam

Shantanu Mahabharate won an injunction order against aborting his 8th child. The respondent had argued aginst her ssaying that it was clear case of Section 498-S or the domestic violence by the eighth son and that ganga was only doing as per the section 498-S because it was causing her mental and emotional distress

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

CSR misuse statistics too low ?
& counter view
According to CSR teh statistics of miuse are around 10% . while as in my earlier posts karnatak judiciary found muse to be a minimum of 45% . This was reported by Justice Saldhana in one of the judgement One of the two has to be closer to the studies . One of the statitics is by an organsation whose aim of the studies was to disabuse any notion that any misuse existing. that even thry could find such misuse is that it is glarignly obvious. the other is by a venerable institution whose interest is only in dispensing justice .

Another question how come non of the member of ashakiran , Sangybalya or Save india Family were contacted at all ? The statistical probabilty of that not happening is ver low and yet it happened. I am little surprised though it is not an impossibility that statistical sampling could have left them out entirely.

I contacted the CSR in August asking them to share their Sampling methodology and their Technique for defining use versus abuse and they did not reply . My Mistake I should have persisted more then leaving it at a few mails.

Given this background it is important to reanalyse the data in terms of sampling technique and classification technique to define use/ versus abuse. I am geared to up to Apply my Assertion Material Methodology of Analsys for this and eager to do so to find the eality amongst the multiple figures of misuse of the 498a.