Article on Misuse of gender specific laws by women

Article on Misuse of gender specific laws by women

When we says that equality is the essential core of the constitution , we observe in our law system that ,there are various laws which are in the favour of the women .Now the reason of the enactment of these laws is the patrirachial setup of india which is evident from the historical background of the country where the
discrimination was evident from the family setup to economic sector .

Today the laws we see for protection of the women have become a tool to harass the family of the male counterpart and his ownself . Many patriarchal societies are also patrilineal, meaning that the male lineage inherits the property and title.

Historically,

patriarchy has manifested itself in the social, legal, political, and economic organization of a range of different cultures. The analysis of patriarchy and its effects is a major topic within the social sciences and humanities.

Today where we find that women are developing with a great growth in their career whereas on the other we find that women in rural sector need a support for their growth in all sector because of psychological mindset of the family .When we find laws for protection of women will helpful their growth we find that the actual victim
is not being helped by the laws but the laws is being used for blackmailing or disrupting the reputation of family of male. There are various laws like sec 375 with punishment in sec 376 of IPC which cover rape cases is used in wrong manner by female counterpart as it observed in report of the national crime records bureau in 2016. A trend among women filing false rape cases stands exposed with the Delhi Commission of Women (DCW) revealing shocking statistics showing that 53.2% of the rape cases filed between April 2013 and July 2014 in Delhi were found ‘false’. The Parliament had adopted strict laws last year to prevent crime against women. The report says that between April 2013 and July 2014, of the 2,753 complaints of rape, only 1,287 cases were found to be true, and the remaining 1,464 cases were found to be false.

The report further revealed that between June 2013 and December 2013, the number of cases found to be untrue were 525. And in between, January 2014 and July 2014, the number of false rape cases were 900. The Delhi Commission of Women further said it was investigating individual complaints of rape to ensure the
victims get justice. However, it added that in many cases, the complainant turned hostile, and that revenge
emerged to be the most common reason for filing a false complaint, DNA reported.
Most rapes go unreported because the rape victims fear retaliation and humiliation, both in India and throughout the world. ]  Indian parliamentarians have stated that the rape problem in India is being underestimated because many cases are not reported, even though more victims are increasingly coming out and reporting rape and sexual assaults.

Few states in India have tried to estimate or survey unreported cases sexual assault. The estimates for unreported rapes in India vary widely. The National Crime Records Bureau report of 2006 mentions that about 71% rape crimes go unreported. In 2017, in fact, the Delhi High Court observed that the law is used by women
for “vendetta” when relationships sour. While the judicial bodies are trying to make clear demarcations between rape and consensual sex when it comes to false promises of marriage, many Indians believe rape laws should not be used to regulate intimate relationships.

In April 2019, the Supreme Court of India (SC) passed a verdict that stated that if a man goes back on his promise to marry a woman, sex between those consenting adults can be considered rape. But clarifying what it actually meant, the SC, on August 21, held that not every failed promise to marry can lead to a rape charge.The court stated that if the woman continues to have sex with the man despite remaining uncertain that it would lead to marriage, she cannot charge the said man of rape. The court also added that the individual who makes a choice to act after evaluating the actions and their possible consequences, “consents” to such action.The ruling came
when the SC bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Indira Banerjee were hearing a rape case by an assistant commissioner of sales tax, against a deputy commandant of Central Reserve Police Force. The couple was apparently in a relationship for six years and lived in each other’s houses on multiple occasions. The
complainant said the accused had sex with her on the promise of marriage but got doubtful about it later because of her caste. The woman went on to file a complaint in 2016 when he told her about his engagement with another woman. In the light of this case, the SC bench said there’s a difference between a “false promise”
and a “breach of a promise”. “Where the promise to marry is false and the intention of the maker at the time of making the promise itself was not to abide by it but to deceive the woman to convince her to engage in sexual relations, there is a misconception of fact that vitiates the woman’s consent,” the bench said, while agreeing to quash the complaint. “On the other hand, a breach of a promise cannot be said to be a false promise. To establish a false promise, the maker of the promise should have had no intention of upholding his word at the
time of giving it.”

Article on Misuse of gender specific laws by women

Even sec354(assault to outrage modesty of women ) ,sec354A(sexual harassment ),sec 504 (criminal intimidation)these all are being used by the women in the wrong manner which shows that women are falsely accusing the male counterpart as it evident from the the sarvjit case which was a much-hyped and controversial sexual harassment case filed by a woman named Jasleen Kaur against Sarvjeet Singh in 2015, he has been acquitted of all charges by Delhi’s Tis Hazari court on October 25 2019 .Kaur, who is an Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) member and former student of St. Stephen’s College, Delhi, had accused Singh of harassment and molestation in 2015 following a dispute between the two at a traffic signal in Delhi.Kaur had then taken to Facebook to share her side of the story, posting Sarvajeet’s picture with it, which garnered massive attention including a media trial, during which he was labelled ‘Delhi ka Darinda’.Singh had retorted by claiming that the allegations made against him were false and it was Kaur instead who had picked a fight with him.Singh,
who maintained his innocence over the course of the trial and appeared for all the hearings, has finally been exonerated noting that the testimony of the complainant was not ‘trustworthy’ and ‘casts serious doubt over the prosecution’.Kaur on the other hand skipped 14 trial hearings claiming that she was unable to be present
due to ‘academic commitments’ in Canada.Following Singh’s acquittal, Twitterati has demanded that Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and former Times Now Editor-In-Chief, Arnab Goswami for jumping the gun and apologise to him. Now this case proves that how the male counterpart are easily blamed and framed as accused even society saw them as the culprit and cut off ties with them socially
Sec 498 –A is seen as the tool in the hands of the family member to harrasss family of male for mainly for allegation of dowry and mental harrsament for demand of dowry by relative and husband. Even the court finds difficulty in finding the actual cases which deemed to be true. It is seen the Dowry Prohibition Act of
1961, both giving and accepting dowry in India is an offence.  The punishment for violating the law is 5 years imprisonment + Rs 15,000 ($ 300 AUD) fine or the value of the dowry given, whichever is more. In 1983, Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) were enacted to make it easier for an Indian wife to seek redressal
for harassment by the husband’s family. Section 304B of the IPC relates to dowry deaths, or the death of a woman in the initial seven years of marriage as a result of a dowry demand by her husband or his family/relatives. Section 498A of the IPC, popularly known as the anti-dowry law, prohibits cruelty by husband or
his relatives towards a woman of the kind that might harm her or force her to commit suicide or relates to a demand for money or property. This amendment allows immediate arrest and jailing of a woman’s spouse and her in-laws in the case of harassment or cruelty.  The offence of cruelty under this Section is non–compoundable.

Article on Misuse of gender specific laws by women

In other words, it cannot be withdrawn by the petitioner and is also non-bailable. This means a mere complaint results in a mandatory arrest, and it is then a matter of discretion of the court to grant or refuse bail.but with increase in no. of fake cases in India, Supreme Court noted in July 2017 that the law is being increasingly “misused by some disgruntled wives” to frame their husbands and his relatives. Quoting the National Crime Records Bureau’s (NCRB) data, the bench said that nearly 200,000 people were arrested over dowry offences in 2012, but only 14.4% of the accused were convicted. We are conscious of the object for which
the provision was brought into the statute…. At the same time, violation of human rights of (the) innocent cannot be brushed aside,” the bench had said.To this effect, the Supreme Court of India had ordered the formation of family welfare committee in every district, to probe the veracity of complaints filed under Section
498A.The judges ordered the police “not to automatically arrest” an accused, but to go through a nine-point checklist to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest.And in cases where arrests are made, a magistrate must approve further detention of the accused, the court had ruled.Male victims want their voices heard at the dowry abuse inquiry.Today all the aspect shows that laws which were made for the welfare of the women is being used as tool for harassment not as shield because the actual statistics show that actual cases are being not registered. so there is need of the SC to bring with judgment various reforms.

BY – Volunteer

REFERENCES – HINUSTAN TIMES ARTICLE
TIMES NOW REPORT
WWW.LIVELAW.COM
INDIAN PENAL CODE BARE ACT
WWW.INDIAN KANOON .COM
NCRB REPORT OF 2016