Abla Naari’s harassed their junior for her good looks !

Yes this is true. Senior girl students of RKDF College, severely ragged their junior Anita Sharma, leading her to commit suicide. Her only fault was she was good looking, hence attracted more attention from boys than their liking. Result, she was subjected to severe ragging which leads her to commit suicide. Imagine if the same happened by men, this story would have made headlines, but since this is done by women, it was not given required importance !!

——————————————————————————————————————————————

Anita was harassed because of her good looks: Police

BHOPAL: Anita Sharma was a victim of harassment because of her good looks, said police on Sunday.

“Anita was a good looking girl and a number of students including boy students, would interact with her. It probably did not go well with accused senior girl students who started harassing her for no reason,” police officials said. Anita committed suicide on August 6.

From statements of college students, it emerged that accused senior girl students of RKDF College ragged her because of her good looks, said Station House Officer (SHO) of Kamla Nagar police station Manish Raj Singh.

They continued to target her despite the fact that she was her junior, police said on Sunday. Over 12 people have been questioned so far.

In her suicide note, she wrote harassment by seniors forced her to take the extreme step.

Four senior girl students and an associate professor were booked and sent to jail for abetment to suicide.

Investigating officials at the Kamla Nagar police station said they have enough evidence against to nail the accused. The charges could attract a maximum punishment of 10 years, the police added.

The police have denied accessing accounts of the deceased on social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter or Orkut. Police officers hinted that if required they may access them in future.

The police are still clueless about boyfriends of the accused senior girl students the deceased had mentioned in suicide note.

 

Link to original news article: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bhopal/Anita-was-harassed-because-of-her-good-looks-Police/articleshow/21770650.cms?intenttarget=no

Yukta Mookhey – A classic case how 498A is used today !

This is one story I would be updating time to time, till the end …..

Well we all know Yukta Mookhey, former miss world (1999). She had been married since November 2008 to one Prince Tuli. Few days back they hit the headlines, when Yukta moved to court on July 3rd, 2013, accusing her husband and father in law, mother in law, 2 sister in laws of dowry harassment, unnatural sex etc etc. It is said that they went to a holiday in April 2012, and after 2 months problem grew relating to her acting career. So she did not wanted to sacrifice her career, and that was mostly one of the reasons for the conflict. Moreover, she was residing at her parents place along with their child for last one year as they had problems. So a smart, educated, modern, ex miss world crowned  “abla naari” took one year to understand that she was subjected to such cruelty by her husband and in laws that they should be booked under 498A / 406 / 377. You can read the complete story here.

Next what she did, she moved to court, obviously objected the anticipatory bail application moved by her husband and in laws, demanded that they should be remanded in jail for sure. Next, she hired a PR agency, to badmouth about her husbands family. She went ahead and stated he has psychological problems. While she is going all out harming the reputation of her husbands family, she managed to secure restraining order from court against him speaking about this matter in media, stated that he is in possession of some intimate videos of her, which, if leaked, can outrage the modesty of a woman. She also said that she brought streedhan worth 2 crore, and got stuff worth 2 lakhs in return only. You can read the complete story here.

Till now, it is progressing like any other common 498A story of an abla naari. But a simple google search will reveal that this is not the complete picture. She and her family are not alien to 498A world. In the year 2004, her uncle, his wife, and their 2 sons were arrested by Mulund police on charges of “subjecting wife to cruelty” and “causing hurt using dangerous weapon”.  The complaint was lodged by her sister in law.  So, obviously she was aware of 498A and its power. When her own marriage was on the rocks, she used the same ‘brahmastra’ !! You can read the complete story here.

Update 17.08.2013

Prince Tuli, in an interview with Nagpur Mirror, said that he will fight against the misuse of 498A. Below excerpts tells it all …

Nagpur Today   : What shall be your future course of action in this context?

Prince Tuli         : Around fifty to sixty thousand people commit suicide every year just because of these fake, fictitious allegations and misuse of the 498 A law. It’s high time that this victimization of families and the stupid gender bias should be stopped. I’ll fight not just for myself, but every victim of the misuse of this law till I breathe my last.” Read the complete interview here.

Update: 19.08.2013:

Yukta Mookhey moved Bombay High Court, challenging the arrest relief secured by her husband and in laws from the sessions court though Prince Tuli is said to be cooperating with the police with their investigation. So it is quite clear that how badly she wants them behind bar !! You can read the complete story here.

to be continued …..

Don’t give wrong advice, lawyers warned

This also happened in our country. A lawyer tricked a young widow to lodge cases against her Mother In Law. The judge immediately declined the prayer saying there is no such provision under the said law. not only that, the honorable judge went ahead, issued an directive, to advise all the advocates not to use ill practices and misguide litigants in filing baseless cases just to loot some money from them. Please read the complete story below:

—————————————————————————————————

MUMBAI: The principal judge of the family court recently reprimanded a lawyer and directed a legal services authority to warn all advocates on its panel not to give wrong counselling to litigants and exploit them.

The warning came after the court found that a lawyer had given wrong advice to a widow to file a claim for maintenance from her mother-in-law. The widow (28) with a child lost her husband to the 2005 deluge, after which her mother-in-law got compensation.

Dismissing the woman’s petition, judge Laxmi P Rao said, “The registrar of this court is directed to write a letter to the secretary, Mumbai Suburban District Legal Services Authority, Bandra (W) to inform all advocates on the panel not to indulge in ill advising and misleading of the poor litigants, who approach them for justice.” Referring to the petitioner’s lawyer, the judge said, “Such an advocate, who does not have the basic knowledge of law, makes women who are already suffering to further undergo the trauma of litigation, which is fruitless, which is fruitless.”

The judge said the petitioner should have been told to file a recovery suit against the government and the family instead of claiming a maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC. The judge said under this section the petition can be made for maintenance only against the husband by a wife and against the father by a child. “The petition under the section lies on by against a male and can never be against a female. Hence, at the outset, this petition will not fall under the definition of Section 125 of CrPC,” the judge observed.

Petitioner

Razia Anwar (name changed) filed a petition seeking maintenance of Rs 3,000 per month each for herself and her minor daughter on August 9, 2009. Razia had told the court she got married to Abdul Anwar in April 2003 in Kurla. At that time, she was a widow and her husband was a widower with children. The couple had a daughter in November 2004. Razia alleged that after Abdul died in 2005, her mother-in-law agreed to take care of her but later went back on her word. She said her mother-in-law received Rs 2 lakh compensation by concealing the fact that she was Abdul’s wife. Hence she filed the petition in August 2009.

Source: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-08-05/mumbai/41092376_1_mother-in-law-litigants-principal-judge