A tale of two judgements - How the Supreme Court of India treats citizens

Recently the Supreme Court of India(SC), gave two judgements, which got lot of media attention.
The first was about SC dismissing a writ petititon against Congress Leader and son of Sonia Gandhi, Mr.Rahul Gandhi. The judgement is uploaded here.

The other news was about SC quashing a case against a man's sister and her husband, on false allegations. The judgement is uploaded here.

The first case, was an appeal to an order of Allahabad High Court, imposing a fine and dismissing the petition filed by an ex-MLA of Samajwadi Party, alledging Rahul Gandhi of a rape. The SC has used the choicest words of legal abuse to dismiss the appeal. Never ever had been so many abuses hurled in a single judgement. The SC decreased the monetary fine imposed by Allahabad HC but still maintained a fine of Rs.10 lac, which is exemplary.  SC said, the case "was based upon falsehood, was abuse of the process of court and was driven by malice" ....... "Courts  have,  over  the  centuries,  frowned  upon  litigants who, with intent to deceive and mislead the Courts, initiated proceedings without full disclosure of facts and came to the courts with ‘unclean hands’.   Courts have held that such litigants are neither entitled to be heard on the merits of the case nor entitled to any relief. " ...  "A litigant who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands is not entitled to any relief, interim or final." ...... " To enable  the  courts  to  ward  off  unjustified  interference  in  their working,   those   who   indulge   in   immoral   acts   like   perjury, prevarication  and  motivated  falsehood,  must  be  appropriately dealt  with." and more such observations were made.
In the second case, an appeal was filed by a man's sister, since his wife, had implicated her in a false dowry case. The complaint was filed with malafide intention. The wife had got divorce, and still filed a false case of harassment against her ex-husband and his family members. The sister had approached Allahabad High Court, which rejected her plea. However in this case, despite acknowledging that the complaint was totally false, the language in the judgement is very mild. The court doesn't lashes out the complainant for  lodging a false complaint. In fact the overall language of the judgement is very cautious. Despite having dealt with numerous such cases of false complaint by wives, the court was hesitant to utter even a single word against the complainant. All the enthusiasm it had shown in the earlier case, suddenly vanished.

This does raises the obvious questions, like, Why did the language of SC suddenly lost its sting ? Why no action was taken against the wife for lodging false complaint ? Not even a single rupee of fine. Does SC thinks that the relatives of husband don't have any honor ?

More sick is the attitude of Allahabad HC, which clearly showed a favorable bias in the first case.

People who expect justice from courts, are surely very naive, or just trying to get lucky.

Women throws her just born baby boy from third floor

A women in the Indian city of Surat, threw her just born baby boy, out of her window, resulting in its tragic death.

In a chilling incident, a newborn baby boy died after he was flung from the third floor of an apartment by his mother in Puna area. ....
"Pooja has admitted to throwing the baby. We suspect that she did not want a child within a year of marriage," police inspector of Puna police station M N Parmar said.
According to police, neighbours and eye-witnesses called the ambulance service and admitted the newborn to Surat Municipal Corporation's SMIMER Hospital. However, the child did not survive. The incident was brought to light by one of her neighbours Vasubhai Sabalpara, who also lodged a complaint in this regard.

Just watched this on a news channel. The women was interviewed, and admitted that she threw the baby, from their apartment on third floor, out on the streets. A crowd had gathered outside the house, after the baby was thown down.

This incident again highlights how cruel women can be, and that crime is not associated with any gender. The orthodox view in India, is that a Mother is to be revered and she can never do anything wrong. The integrity of a mother should never be questioned. And this presumption is blindly applied to all women. Specifically to a wife. Killing of newborns, by their own mother is not new. http://cursedmale.blogspot.in/2012/10/indian-women-crushes-skull-of-her-three.html . However due to the orthodox mindset of Indian public, general public still aren't prepared to face the fact. Such news is received with sheer dis-belief. If it had been a baby-girl, they would have said, she was pressurized for giving birth to a girl. Now in this case, it is a boy, and the media is not highlighting the gender of the infant. Sheer nonsense arguments are put up to defend the women is question. Hope people stop portrayal of women always as abla-naari's (Helpless women) who do crime only because of duress.

Just imagine, what would have happened, if the genders of all in this scenario  would be reversed. Then it would had been the breaking news in media. Women organizations would have demanded a law to be framed, to keep fathers away from their newborns, the father, and his family members would have been beaten to pulp, and so on. But just because the accused is a young women, she is receiving sympathetic treatment.

Taliban style Rape Law in India

Yes, its true. Indian laws related to sexual offense (against women) are very similar to Taliban. The only difference being that in India, you replace male with female. In fact, the Indian laws are worse then the Taliban implemented sharia law.

Under Taliban law, rape can only be proven if the rapist confesses or if there are four male witnesses.
Under Indian law, if any women says she has been raped by a man. The man is convicted solely on the basis of the verbal testimony of the women.
Refer Indian Penal Code 375, 376. Indian Evidence Act 114A, and 146.

Some salient points about how the Indian courts consider arguments in rape cases.
- Mere verbal statement of any women is sufficient to start criminal proceedings against any man (of any nationality) in India. The words of the women are taken as gospel truth.
- Even if the women admits that the physical relationship was consensual. And she later wants to press rape charges, she can do so.
- If the women has NO injury marks, nor even bruises on her body. Indian courts view that such arguments do not deny the fact that she was raped.
- No women would ever lie about rape. So if she says, rape has happened, and even if there is no other evidence against the accused. The accused will be convicted. No DNA, or any other evidence is required. If there are lapses in the prosecution story, they are to be overlooked.
- If the accused tries to point finger at the character of the women. It will weigh heavily against him.
- The names and photos of the accused get published in news media. And even if the accused are acquitted, the name of the complainant remains secret.
- The accused remains in jail, throughout the trial. Only if the accused has tons of money, contacts, can he get bail. Else he will rot in jail. (In the TISS rape cases, all the accused were acquitted. But they had to rot in jail for the entire duration of trial. No apologies from the legal system for the torture they had to undergo.)

The Indian Supreme Court, has constantly reiterated all of the above in its judgements, and continues to do so.

Research has shown that most complaints of rape in India are fake.  A careful look at the all the major rape cases, shows the true nature of these fakes charges. Take for example, the Hinjewadi rape case. Despite no evidence of rape, the accused were convicted. There were plenty of gaps in the prosecution theory, all of which were overlooked. The judgement is available online. Such kind of judgements are a shame to any civilized society.

The Indian male mentality is very much like a dog. When dogs are copulating, other dogs don't like that, and start barking. Same is the case here. Whenever news of rape is published, passionate views flood the media house through web and SMS. A common, strong demand is to hang the accused, stone them in public, cut off his genitals, etc. And to torture them in the worst possible manner. These comments are based totally on the headline of a rape news. For the masses, the accused are already convicts.

The nonsense called "Reservation for Women"

In Pune(India), public buses entirely reserved for women have been launched. The authorities recruited and selected women conductors for these buses. Already in all public transport buses, 50% of the seats are reserved for female passengers. On one hand, there is a huge false propaganda, that the ratio of females is declining. Then why flat 50% reservation for women. Add to that, most of the people traveling are males. This makes the reservation for women pure nonsense. Even if an elderly male seats on these women only seats, normally young women would make the elderly man vacate the seat. This is the shameful "Women Power".

 http://epaper.loksatta.com/60882/loksatta-pune/07-10-2012#page/3/2  (In Marathi)

 TOI printed this story, but seemed ashamed to print, that women conductors had left their job immediately after just three days of service.

Why did these women conductors quit their job ? The primary reason being, that  women in general don't want responsibility. They don't want stressful jobs. They are mostly interested in non-stressful desk jobs. Add to it,  they know, that in general women are impolite and intolerant. It is much more easy to handle men. And more importantly,  women get harassed most from women. Hence women try to avoid each other, and hide behind men. If Indian women are so capable, why do they always run away from stressful jobs ?

Such reservation for women, is a very cheap gimmick. Even though majority of the workforce is male. That too, those who are involved in hard physically demanding jobs are mostly men. So who needs more travelling comfort, Men or Women ?  Most of the money that the public transport system makes, comes from men's pocket. And it is shamelessly splurged on facilities for lazy women. These women are really woe-men  (You are free to interpret :))

Indian women crushes skull of her three month old daughter, but pleads innocence

An Indian women crushed  her daughters head, which resulted in the death of the three month old child. Inspite of this in-humane act, the so-called social liberators in India, are out to defend the women.

Dharmishta told the cops that Aahuti had been crying incessantly and she couldn't take it anymore. In a fit of rage, she crushed the child's head while Aahuti was nuzzling up to her on September 23. Later she also crushed the infant's body, fracturing her ribs and spine.

As usual, the police have filed complaint against the father too. Even though the father was unaware of his wife's cruel acts. 

Despite this gory act, Indian media is shamelessly trying to defend the women. Even though the perpetrator of the crime is a women, this is portrayed as a "Crime against women".  And trying to somehow  implicate the father too. Even when it is clear that the father was totally unaware of his wife's misdeeds

The violence inflicted on three-month-old Aahuti Joshi by her parents. 


The outcome of this gruesome incident  is very predictable. The women in question will be acquitted, or let away with some very minor punishment. As was seen in the below case where the women, had mercilessly killed the infant, by fracturing its skull.

The judgement for this case is uploaded on google docs.  

Even with all such events, Indian society still cannot believe that  "A women can be a criminal"

Indian mother sells baby boy to buy mobile phone, jeans and tops

An Indian mother sold her baby boy, for Rs. 5000 (less then $100). 


the money was used to buy a mobile phone and a pair of jeans among other things. "Rakhi Patra of Mundamala village who sold her 17 month-old son for Rs 5,000 purchased a new mobile phone, a pair of jeans, few new tops (to go with the jeans) and memory cards for her mobile with the money," Jajpur superintendent of police Deepak Kumar said on Wednesday.

And further
Rejecting the mother's claim that she sold the child to meet the legal expenses of her jailed husband, Kumar said her new acquisitions were evidence of the fact that she did not sell her baby boy due to poverty.
...The woman refused to take back her son after police handed her the boy after recovering him from Cuttack on Tuesday.

Now in place of the baby boy, if it would have been a baby girl, imagine what would have had happened ? The news would have been plastered over everywhere. News media would be full of reports, as to how girl child are treated in an in-humane way in India.  How the gender ratio is so skewed in India. How girls are unwanted, blah blah blah.

Now this women has acted in an inhuman way and lied. But don't think, that she has committed any offense. Since it is a well settled principle of law in India, that women cannot commit any offense. And if she does, that would be because of some grave compulsion. And if anyone presses for charges against her, that person will be termed as "Anti-Women".

Being objective is termed as anti-women

During any gender debate, if you put unbiased thoughts about equality. That men and women should have equal rights and responsibilities too. You will be immediately termed as anti-women. Things have gone to such extreme, that even if you ask for basic rights for Men, and don't say anything about women. The first query, that is often put up is "Are you anti-women" ?  On the other hand, those who bash up males and put up extremely biased anti-male thoughts are hailed as social reformers.

If one looks at the real facts, like the constantly growing suicide of Men in India. If one tries to spread awareness about how men are over stressed in all spheres of life, and which is causing this silent genocide of men. Still the first query, that is often put up is "Are you anti-women" ?

If you objectively try to fight for Mens Rights, you will be always be labeled as anti-women by majority of the public. Why do people think that being objective is "anti-women". There are several reasons for that. We live in a society which is very gender biased, and heavily sympathetic to women. Add to it, from childhood, minds are poisoned against males. Human civilization has still to mature, to truly understand the meaning of equality. Till the time, that maturity comes, Mens Rights Activists (MRA's) will always be termed as anti women.

But are MRA's concerned about this narrow minded view of the society ?  Well of course not. Since MRA's know, that human civilization has not yet matured, and it will take years to shed thousands of years of cultivated anti-male hatred (misandry). If anyone is terming MRA's as anti-women. It is the incorrect perspective of the male hater. Hopefully with efforts of MRA's, we will live in a society, where there will be gender equality.