Hello everybody,
As of 26/10/06, a law is in force to protect the interests of Indian women who face problems with their husbands, etc. Maximum penalties are also levied. The post is still under construction.
Regards,
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
32As of 26/10/06, a law is in force to protect the interests of Indian women who face problems with their husbands, etc. Maximum penalties are also levied. The post is still under construction.
Regards,
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Domestic Violence Act, 2005
Press Trust of India / New Delhi October 25, 2006
Beating or insulting your wife from tomorrow can land you in jail with a fine of up to Rs 20,000.
Coming into effect from tomorrow, the Domestic Violence Act 2005 is primarily meant to provide protection to the wife or female live-in partner from violence at the hands of the husband or male live-in partner or his relatives.
Domestic violence under the Act includes actual abuse or the threat of abuse whether physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, or economic, said a statement from the Ministry of Women and Child Development, which issued a notification today to bring the Act into force.
Harassment by way of unlawful dowry demands to the woman or her relatives would also be covered under this definition, it said adding the law also extends its protection to women who are sisters, widows, or mothers. Preventing one's wife from taking up a job or forcing her to leave a job are also under the purview of the Act.
"We have been trying for long to protect women from domestic violence. In India alone, around 70% of women are victims of these violent acts in one form or another," Renuka Chowdhury, Minister of State for Women & Child Development, said.
The ministry has simultaneously issued another notification laying down rules framed for the implementation of the Act which will provide for, among other things, the appointment of protection officers, service providers, and counsellors.
One of the most important features of the Act is women's right to secure housing, the statement said, adding it provides a right to reside in the matrimonial and shared household, whether or not she has any title in the household.
Regards
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Press Trust of India / New Delhi October 25, 2006
Beating or insulting your wife from tomorrow can land you in jail with a fine of up to Rs 20,000.
Coming into effect from tomorrow, the Domestic Violence Act 2005 is primarily meant to provide protection to the wife or female live-in partner from violence at the hands of the husband or male live-in partner or his relatives.
Domestic violence under the Act includes actual abuse or the threat of abuse whether physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, or economic, said a statement from the Ministry of Women and Child Development, which issued a notification today to bring the Act into force.
Harassment by way of unlawful dowry demands to the woman or her relatives would also be covered under this definition, it said adding the law also extends its protection to women who are sisters, widows, or mothers. Preventing one's wife from taking up a job or forcing her to leave a job are also under the purview of the Act.
"We have been trying for long to protect women from domestic violence. In India alone, around 70% of women are victims of these violent acts in one form or another," Renuka Chowdhury, Minister of State for Women & Child Development, said.
The ministry has simultaneously issued another notification laying down rules framed for the implementation of the Act which will provide for, among other things, the appointment of protection officers, service providers, and counsellors.
One of the most important features of the Act is women's right to secure housing, the statement said, adding it provides a right to reside in the matrimonial and shared household, whether or not she has any title in the household.
Regards
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
On the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act
- Srilata Swaminathan
The Domestic Violence Bill which had been pending before the Lok Sabha for many years has finally been passed this monsoon session. There have been a number of changes made to it and serious lacunae that existed at the time the NDA government drafted it have been suitably amended. Bill No. 116 of 2005 has now officially become The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005. While the UPA government has shown its total lack of political will and has been as impotent as the NDA in passing the 33% women's reservation bill they have been able to push through this - maybe as the lesser evil!
The new act contains five chapters and 37 sections. Its main features are 1. that the term 'domestic violence' has been made wide enough to encompass every possibility as it covers all forms of physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and economic abuse that can harm, cause injury to, endanger the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, either mental or physical of the aggrieved person. (Ch.II, S.3) This is a genuinely wide definition and covers every eventuality. 2. the definition of an 'aggrieved' person' is equally wide and covers not just the wife but a woman who is the sexual partner of the male irrespective of whether she is his legal wife or not. The daughter, mother, sister, child (male or female), widowed relative, in fact, any woman residing in the household who is related in some way to the respondent, is also covered by the Act. (Ch.I, S.2(a)). The respondent under the definition given in the Act is "any male, adult person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person" but so that his mother, sister and other relatives do not go scot free, the case can also be filed against relatives of the husband or male partner.
It appears from the Act that the information regarding an act or acts of domestic violence does not necessarily have to be lodged by the aggrieved party but by "any person who has reason to believe that" such an act has been or is being committed. Which means that neighbours, social workers, relatives etc. can all take initiative on behalf of the victim (Ch.III, S4).
One great weakness of the previous NDA bill has been effectively removed in the present Act and that is that the magistrate has the powers to permit the aggrieved woman to stay in her place of abode and cannot be evicted by the husband in retaliation. This fear of being driven out of the house effectively silenced many women and made them silent sufferers. The court, by this new Act, can now order that she not only reside in the same house but that a part of the house can even be allotted to her for her personal use (Ch.IV, S.17) even if she has no legal claim or share in the property.
S.18 of the same chapter allows the magistrate to protect the woman from acts of violence or even "acts that are likely to take place" in the future and can prohibit the respondent from dispossessing the aggrieved person or in any other manner disturbing her possessions, entering the aggrieved person's place of work or, if the aggrieved person is a child, the school. The respondent can also be restrained from attempting to communicate in any form, whatsoever, with the aggrieved person, including personal, oral, written, electronic or telephonic contact" (S18d). The respondent can even be prohibited from entering the room/area/house that is allotted to her by the court.
The Act allows magistrates to impose monetary relief and monthly payments of maintenance. The respondent can also be made to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child of the aggrieved person as a result of domestic violence and can also cover loss of earnings, medical expenses, loss or damage to property and can also cover the maintenance of the victim and her children (Ch.IV, S.20). S.22 allows the magistrate to make the respondent pay compensation and damages for injuries including mental torture and emotional distress caused by acts of domestic violence.
Ch. V . S.31 gives a penalty up to one year imprisonment and/or a fine up to Rs. 20,000/- for and offence. The offence is also considered cognisable and non-bailable (Ch.V, S.32(i) while S. 32 (2) goes even further and says that "under the sole testimony of the aggrieved person, the court may conclude that an offence has been committed by the accused"
The Act also ensures speedy justice as the court has to start proceedings and have the first hearing within 3 days of the complaint being filed in court and every case must be disposed of within a period of sixty days of the first hearing (Ch.IV, S.12 (a) (4) and (5)). It make provisions for the state to provide for Protection Officers and the whole machinery by which to implement the Act.
After going through the Act with a fine-tooth comb, the only major change I would make to the Act is in S.16 of Chapter IV which allows the magistrate to hold proceedings in camera "if either party to the proceedings so desires". Now, our experience in AIPWA has proven that sometimes in camera proceedings can protect the aggrieved woman from a lot of humiliation and shame especially in cases where explicit acts of sexual abuse and violence are being discussed in an open court and it allows for her dignity and privacy to be maintained. BUT, we have also seen trials where the in camera proceedings only intimidated the aggrieved in favour of the respondent. This is especially so when the aggrieved is the only woman in court facing a completely male phalanx of hostile, sneering magistrates, lawyers, officials, police, male respondent etc. The solution is to change this section to only allow for in camera proceedings NOT when EITHER party so desires but only if the aggrieved party so desires. Also, the aggrieved party should be allowed to be accompanied by any relative/woman social worker etc. of her choice for moral support.
Misuse of the act, like all such acts in India , cannot be ruled out. In fact, with a system as corrupt as ours, money, clout and muscle power will always call the shots. And as long as the woman stays a puppet or pawn in the hands of her male relatives, she will always be manipulated and used. However, with this Act, there is at last legal recognition of the scale of domestic violence that actually exists. This Act should also put an end to many of the misuses of the Anti Dowry Act.(4) . But when one sees the dismal record of implementation of Acts related to giving relief to the oppressed, one cannot but be sceptical. For instance, the Rape Act brings only 5% of all rapes committed to court and of those only 5% get convictions!
The main beneficiaries of the Act will, of course, be women of the propertied upper classes. But there is no doubt that with this Act a whole Pandora's Box of litigation will be thrown open and all the degradation, brutality and cruelty to women that has been carefully swept under the carpet for centuries in our 'old, rich heritage and civilisation' is all going to be exposed - and about time! For those feminist groups that see the family or the male as the main cause for women's oppression, this Act will open up all sorts of possibilities in their struggles.
But for the revolutionary left organisations that see the present system as the cause for women's oppression, these Acts are no solution to the basic problems that women face and are, at best, mere stop-gap measures. The underlying reasons for the violence against women which are her enslavement under the present system; the double-standards and hypocrisy of monogamy; the fact that she has been effectively 'privatised' for centuries, removed from public production, public decision-making and interaction; has no economic independence, is relegated to domestic drudgery and is virtually the personal property of her husband/in-laws is not remotely understood or tackled. It is like giving a prisoner certain rights to resist torture and abuse but doing nothing for releasing him from his shackles! (1)
The capitalist system whereby women, especially poor working women are doubly enslaved, cannot offer any long-term solution for the emancipation of women or their freedom from violence. It is only socialism that can truly emancipate women by not only making her equal under law and giving her every legal protection but, far more important, reversing the injustices of the past thousands of years by socialising the means of production, bringing the woman back into social production and decision-making, freeing her of her domestic enslavement by the state taking responsibility through crèches, community kitchens, old-peoples' homes etc. It is only a new socialist system that will free both the man and the woman, make them truly equal partners - economically, socially and politically - so that they can enter into a genuine partnership and thus evolve the new type of family where neither will be victim nor villain.
Am I against the Act? No, not at all. But its limitations must be kept in mind. Within the existing unjust and unequal bourgeois system here is an act of legislature that gives oppressed women some respite, but a very temporary one as it will not end the hypocrisy of bourgeois monogamy. Hopefully, the contradictions will be so heightened that society will have to go in for more long-lasting solutions. However, this Act does ensure that women are not totally at the receiving end but have some weapon to fight back with. As Marx so concisely put it: "You cannot give equal laws to unequal people" (2)
Further Reading :
1. 'Origin of Family, Private Property and State' by F. Engels
2. 'The Gotha Programme' by Karl Marx
3. "Home is where the Law is" by Indira Jaisingh, Indian Express, 8 Sept. ;05.
4. "Reflections on Domestic Violence" by Flavia Agnes, Asian Age, 6 Sept. 05
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
- Srilata Swaminathan
The Domestic Violence Bill which had been pending before the Lok Sabha for many years has finally been passed this monsoon session. There have been a number of changes made to it and serious lacunae that existed at the time the NDA government drafted it have been suitably amended. Bill No. 116 of 2005 has now officially become The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005. While the UPA government has shown its total lack of political will and has been as impotent as the NDA in passing the 33% women's reservation bill they have been able to push through this - maybe as the lesser evil!
The new act contains five chapters and 37 sections. Its main features are 1. that the term 'domestic violence' has been made wide enough to encompass every possibility as it covers all forms of physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and economic abuse that can harm, cause injury to, endanger the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, either mental or physical of the aggrieved person. (Ch.II, S.3) This is a genuinely wide definition and covers every eventuality. 2. the definition of an 'aggrieved' person' is equally wide and covers not just the wife but a woman who is the sexual partner of the male irrespective of whether she is his legal wife or not. The daughter, mother, sister, child (male or female), widowed relative, in fact, any woman residing in the household who is related in some way to the respondent, is also covered by the Act. (Ch.I, S.2(a)). The respondent under the definition given in the Act is "any male, adult person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person" but so that his mother, sister and other relatives do not go scot free, the case can also be filed against relatives of the husband or male partner.
It appears from the Act that the information regarding an act or acts of domestic violence does not necessarily have to be lodged by the aggrieved party but by "any person who has reason to believe that" such an act has been or is being committed. Which means that neighbours, social workers, relatives etc. can all take initiative on behalf of the victim (Ch.III, S4).
One great weakness of the previous NDA bill has been effectively removed in the present Act and that is that the magistrate has the powers to permit the aggrieved woman to stay in her place of abode and cannot be evicted by the husband in retaliation. This fear of being driven out of the house effectively silenced many women and made them silent sufferers. The court, by this new Act, can now order that she not only reside in the same house but that a part of the house can even be allotted to her for her personal use (Ch.IV, S.17) even if she has no legal claim or share in the property.
S.18 of the same chapter allows the magistrate to protect the woman from acts of violence or even "acts that are likely to take place" in the future and can prohibit the respondent from dispossessing the aggrieved person or in any other manner disturbing her possessions, entering the aggrieved person's place of work or, if the aggrieved person is a child, the school. The respondent can also be restrained from attempting to communicate in any form, whatsoever, with the aggrieved person, including personal, oral, written, electronic or telephonic contact" (S18d). The respondent can even be prohibited from entering the room/area/house that is allotted to her by the court.
The Act allows magistrates to impose monetary relief and monthly payments of maintenance. The respondent can also be made to meet the expenses incurred and losses suffered by the aggrieved person and any child of the aggrieved person as a result of domestic violence and can also cover loss of earnings, medical expenses, loss or damage to property and can also cover the maintenance of the victim and her children (Ch.IV, S.20). S.22 allows the magistrate to make the respondent pay compensation and damages for injuries including mental torture and emotional distress caused by acts of domestic violence.
Ch. V . S.31 gives a penalty up to one year imprisonment and/or a fine up to Rs. 20,000/- for and offence. The offence is also considered cognisable and non-bailable (Ch.V, S.32(i) while S. 32 (2) goes even further and says that "under the sole testimony of the aggrieved person, the court may conclude that an offence has been committed by the accused"
The Act also ensures speedy justice as the court has to start proceedings and have the first hearing within 3 days of the complaint being filed in court and every case must be disposed of within a period of sixty days of the first hearing (Ch.IV, S.12 (a) (4) and (5)). It make provisions for the state to provide for Protection Officers and the whole machinery by which to implement the Act.
After going through the Act with a fine-tooth comb, the only major change I would make to the Act is in S.16 of Chapter IV which allows the magistrate to hold proceedings in camera "if either party to the proceedings so desires". Now, our experience in AIPWA has proven that sometimes in camera proceedings can protect the aggrieved woman from a lot of humiliation and shame especially in cases where explicit acts of sexual abuse and violence are being discussed in an open court and it allows for her dignity and privacy to be maintained. BUT, we have also seen trials where the in camera proceedings only intimidated the aggrieved in favour of the respondent. This is especially so when the aggrieved is the only woman in court facing a completely male phalanx of hostile, sneering magistrates, lawyers, officials, police, male respondent etc. The solution is to change this section to only allow for in camera proceedings NOT when EITHER party so desires but only if the aggrieved party so desires. Also, the aggrieved party should be allowed to be accompanied by any relative/woman social worker etc. of her choice for moral support.
Misuse of the act, like all such acts in India , cannot be ruled out. In fact, with a system as corrupt as ours, money, clout and muscle power will always call the shots. And as long as the woman stays a puppet or pawn in the hands of her male relatives, she will always be manipulated and used. However, with this Act, there is at last legal recognition of the scale of domestic violence that actually exists. This Act should also put an end to many of the misuses of the Anti Dowry Act.(4) . But when one sees the dismal record of implementation of Acts related to giving relief to the oppressed, one cannot but be sceptical. For instance, the Rape Act brings only 5% of all rapes committed to court and of those only 5% get convictions!
The main beneficiaries of the Act will, of course, be women of the propertied upper classes. But there is no doubt that with this Act a whole Pandora's Box of litigation will be thrown open and all the degradation, brutality and cruelty to women that has been carefully swept under the carpet for centuries in our 'old, rich heritage and civilisation' is all going to be exposed - and about time! For those feminist groups that see the family or the male as the main cause for women's oppression, this Act will open up all sorts of possibilities in their struggles.
But for the revolutionary left organisations that see the present system as the cause for women's oppression, these Acts are no solution to the basic problems that women face and are, at best, mere stop-gap measures. The underlying reasons for the violence against women which are her enslavement under the present system; the double-standards and hypocrisy of monogamy; the fact that she has been effectively 'privatised' for centuries, removed from public production, public decision-making and interaction; has no economic independence, is relegated to domestic drudgery and is virtually the personal property of her husband/in-laws is not remotely understood or tackled. It is like giving a prisoner certain rights to resist torture and abuse but doing nothing for releasing him from his shackles! (1)
The capitalist system whereby women, especially poor working women are doubly enslaved, cannot offer any long-term solution for the emancipation of women or their freedom from violence. It is only socialism that can truly emancipate women by not only making her equal under law and giving her every legal protection but, far more important, reversing the injustices of the past thousands of years by socialising the means of production, bringing the woman back into social production and decision-making, freeing her of her domestic enslavement by the state taking responsibility through crèches, community kitchens, old-peoples' homes etc. It is only a new socialist system that will free both the man and the woman, make them truly equal partners - economically, socially and politically - so that they can enter into a genuine partnership and thus evolve the new type of family where neither will be victim nor villain.
Am I against the Act? No, not at all. But its limitations must be kept in mind. Within the existing unjust and unequal bourgeois system here is an act of legislature that gives oppressed women some respite, but a very temporary one as it will not end the hypocrisy of bourgeois monogamy. Hopefully, the contradictions will be so heightened that society will have to go in for more long-lasting solutions. However, this Act does ensure that women are not totally at the receiving end but have some weapon to fight back with. As Marx so concisely put it: "You cannot give equal laws to unequal people" (2)
Further Reading :
1. 'Origin of Family, Private Property and State' by F. Engels
2. 'The Gotha Programme' by Karl Marx
3. "Home is where the Law is" by Indira Jaisingh, Indian Express, 8 Sept. ;05.
4. "Reflections on Domestic Violence" by Flavia Agnes, Asian Age, 6 Sept. 05
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friends,
You seem to be euphoric about the Act. However, you may be aware that the conviction rate under IPC 498A is only less than 2%, which indicates that misuse is more prevalent than proper use.
Thousands of people will find themselves wrongly detained in police stations, courts, or even in jails. Could this not have a detrimental impact on industrial output?
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You seem to be euphoric about the Act. However, you may be aware that the conviction rate under IPC 498A is only less than 2%, which indicates that misuse is more prevalent than proper use.
Thousands of people will find themselves wrongly detained in police stations, courts, or even in jails. Could this not have a detrimental impact on industrial output?
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Dr. Saab,
Good evening.
I am very much aware of our country's rules, laws, and practices. In a nutshell, law makers are first breakers... isn't it? But we cannot bypass the rules/laws, can we, Dr. Saab? Would you break a traffic rule? And you are very much aware of the traffic police. I think there is no need to say any more.
Thanks, Saab.
Regards,
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Good evening.
I am very much aware of our country's rules, laws, and practices. In a nutshell, law makers are first breakers... isn't it? But we cannot bypass the rules/laws, can we, Dr. Saab? Would you break a traffic rule? And you are very much aware of the traffic police. I think there is no need to say any more.
Thanks, Saab.
Regards,
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear brother Sidhehswar,
The problem is not as simple as it appears that you think. We shall continue the discussion but first of all please read the definition of domestic violence as given in the Act and then answer how many complainant women will not exagerate or fabricate their versions of complaints?
regards
"CHAPTER II
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
3.Definition of domestic violence
For the purpose of this Act, any act, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it-
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any dowry or other property or valuable security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause(a) or clause(b) or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.
Explanation I For the purpose of this section,-
(i) “physical abuse†means any act or conduct which is of such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm or danger to life, limb or health or impair the health or development of the aggrieved person and includes assault, criminal intimidation and criminal force;
(ii) “sexual abuse†includes any conduct of a sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise violates the dignity of woman;
(iii) “verbal and emotional abuse†includes-
(a)insults, ridicules, humiliation, name calling and insults or ridicule specially with regard to not having a child or male child; and
(b)repeated threats to cause physical pain to any person in whom th aggrieved person is interested.
(iv) “economic abuse†includes-
(a) deprivation of all or any economic or financial resources to which the aggrieved person is entitled under any law or custom whether payable under an order of a court or otherwise or which the aggrieved person requires out of necessity including, but not limited to, household necessities for the aggrieved person and her children, if any, stridhan, property, jointly or separately owned by the aggrieved person, payment of rental related to the shared household and maintenance;
(b) disposal of household effects, any alienation of assets whether movable or immovable, valuables, shares, securities, bonds and the like or other property in which the aggrieved person has an interest or is entitled to use by virtue of the domestic relationship or which may be reasonably required by the aggrieved person or her children or her stridhan or any other property jointly or separately held by the aggrieved person; and
(c) prohibition or restriction to continued access to resources or facilities which the aggrieved person is entitled to use or enjoy by virtue of the domestic relationship including access to shared household.
ExplanationII: For the purpose of determining whether any act, omission, commission or conduct of the respondent constitutes “domestic violence†under this section, the overall facts and circumstances of the case shall be taken into consideration."
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The problem is not as simple as it appears that you think. We shall continue the discussion but first of all please read the definition of domestic violence as given in the Act and then answer how many complainant women will not exagerate or fabricate their versions of complaints?
regards
"CHAPTER II
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
3.Definition of domestic violence
For the purpose of this Act, any act, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it-
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any dowry or other property or valuable security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause(a) or clause(b) or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.
Explanation I For the purpose of this section,-
(i) “physical abuse†means any act or conduct which is of such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm or danger to life, limb or health or impair the health or development of the aggrieved person and includes assault, criminal intimidation and criminal force;
(ii) “sexual abuse†includes any conduct of a sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise violates the dignity of woman;
(iii) “verbal and emotional abuse†includes-
(a)insults, ridicules, humiliation, name calling and insults or ridicule specially with regard to not having a child or male child; and
(b)repeated threats to cause physical pain to any person in whom th aggrieved person is interested.
(iv) “economic abuse†includes-
(a) deprivation of all or any economic or financial resources to which the aggrieved person is entitled under any law or custom whether payable under an order of a court or otherwise or which the aggrieved person requires out of necessity including, but not limited to, household necessities for the aggrieved person and her children, if any, stridhan, property, jointly or separately owned by the aggrieved person, payment of rental related to the shared household and maintenance;
(b) disposal of household effects, any alienation of assets whether movable or immovable, valuables, shares, securities, bonds and the like or other property in which the aggrieved person has an interest or is entitled to use by virtue of the domestic relationship or which may be reasonably required by the aggrieved person or her children or her stridhan or any other property jointly or separately held by the aggrieved person; and
(c) prohibition or restriction to continued access to resources or facilities which the aggrieved person is entitled to use or enjoy by virtue of the domestic relationship including access to shared household.
ExplanationII: For the purpose of determining whether any act, omission, commission or conduct of the respondent constitutes “domestic violence†under this section, the overall facts and circumstances of the case shall be taken into consideration."
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear brother Sidhehswar and all,
This thread was going on as a soliloquy, and I joined the discussion. However, the author suddenly became silent. The topic itself suggests that it involves excessive flattery towards women. But can this flattery truly ease women in reality? I believe even women are skeptical about it. The outcome of IPC 498A, as the Malimath Committee report states, leads them from "frying pan to fire."
Under this act, the aggrieved person is consistently a woman, while the respondents are men. This sets the stage for a final war between men and women, with the vivid result being the "abolition of family and community of women" as envisioned in the Manifesto of the Communist Party by Marx and Engels in 1947.
With this grim future for families in India looming over a million members and visitors of citehr, there is a failure to address the issue's consequences on industrial output. Silence is not the solution; calamity is in motion, and the corporate sector is bound to bear its share. Flattery towards women is no longer going to be helpful.
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
This thread was going on as a soliloquy, and I joined the discussion. However, the author suddenly became silent. The topic itself suggests that it involves excessive flattery towards women. But can this flattery truly ease women in reality? I believe even women are skeptical about it. The outcome of IPC 498A, as the Malimath Committee report states, leads them from "frying pan to fire."
Under this act, the aggrieved person is consistently a woman, while the respondents are men. This sets the stage for a final war between men and women, with the vivid result being the "abolition of family and community of women" as envisioned in the Manifesto of the Communist Party by Marx and Engels in 1947.
With this grim future for families in India looming over a million members and visitors of citehr, there is a failure to address the issue's consequences on industrial output. Silence is not the solution; calamity is in motion, and the corporate sector is bound to bear its share. Flattery towards women is no longer going to be helpful.
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Hello Dr. Saab,
I'm not silent. I am ready to discuss this issue with you and all members. I have a thousand questions, but why am I silent? It's because I am OUTSTAION handling an industrial accident case in HUBLI. My project manager is likely to go inside the bar. I'll be busy up to this coming week. Once I am back in Bangalore, I will request a HOT discussion on this topic.
Dr. Saab, this author has never learned to be silent. I'm a young chicken ready to be fried at any point in time.
Regards,
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I'm not silent. I am ready to discuss this issue with you and all members. I have a thousand questions, but why am I silent? It's because I am OUTSTAION handling an industrial accident case in HUBLI. My project manager is likely to go inside the bar. I'll be busy up to this coming week. Once I am back in Bangalore, I will request a HOT discussion on this topic.
Dr. Saab, this author has never learned to be silent. I'm a young chicken ready to be fried at any point in time.
Regards,
Sidheshwar
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear brother Sidheshwar,
I will request a heated discussion on this topic. Dr. Saab, this author has never learned to be silent. I am a young chicken ready to be fried at any point in time. Regards.
Please complete your job successfully. Wish you all the best. I am not up for a heated discussion but rather a very cool one. I have no intention of frying anyone but rather aim to rescue those who are likely to move from the "frying pan to the fire" and protect innocents who may be put in the frying pan. Consequently, I am concerned about the potential detriment to industrial output. Please take it easy.
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I will request a heated discussion on this topic. Dr. Saab, this author has never learned to be silent. I am a young chicken ready to be fried at any point in time. Regards.
Please complete your job successfully. Wish you all the best. I am not up for a heated discussion but rather a very cool one. I have no intention of frying anyone but rather aim to rescue those who are likely to move from the "frying pan to the fire" and protect innocents who may be put in the frying pan. Consequently, I am concerned about the potential detriment to industrial output. Please take it easy.
Regards
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Malimath Committee Report Submitted to Government Says as Follows:
"There is a general complaint that Section 498A of the IPC regarding cruelty by the husband or his relatives is subjected to gross misuse and many times operates against the interest of the wife herself. This offense is non-bailable and non-compoundable. Hence, the husband and other members of the family are arrested and can be behind bars, which may result in the husband losing his job. Even if the wife is willing to condone and forgive the lapse of the husband and live in matrimony, this provision comes in the way of spouses returning to the matrimonial home. This hardship can be avoided by making the offense bailable and compoundable."
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
"There is a general complaint that Section 498A of the IPC regarding cruelty by the husband or his relatives is subjected to gross misuse and many times operates against the interest of the wife herself. This offense is non-bailable and non-compoundable. Hence, the husband and other members of the family are arrested and can be behind bars, which may result in the husband losing his job. Even if the wife is willing to condone and forgive the lapse of the husband and live in matrimony, this provision comes in the way of spouses returning to the matrimonial home. This hardship can be avoided by making the offense bailable and compoundable."
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.
2011 brings good news, salaries to grow 20%.pdf
Lessons for Entrepreneurs from most Successful Indian Women.doc