0
0
Blog By-
Drishti Chhattani
Course: BBALLB
College: ITM University
Introduction
Inequality between people of different sexes has been one of the darkest sides of our society, but the inequality between them is not a dilemma born of a modern society, it was created long before the independence of our country. Indian society has always considered men superior to women thus leading to the formation of Patriarchal society in India.
Everything began to change in the 18th century as a group of several men emerged among the many men overwhelmed by their superiority over women, who recognized the need for female empowerment and began to promote the voice of female empowerment groups with the drive to improve the miserable life. women in our country
During the rule of the British in India, the people of India experienced many Socio-cultural changes that ultimately led to the positive evolution of Indian culture, with a high focus and equality for women in India. In 1829, one of the biggest attempts was made by Lord William Bentinck in the XVII century.
To protect women from harassment, there were some provisions that protected them from social evils, one of which was section 375 of the Indian Penal Code of 1840, which was created to protect women from sexual harassment and to stop the rape chart rising in the country. These divisions were created according to the miserable lives of women, so they were strongly in favour of the protection of women, burdening men with the burden of proof, but in modern days there has been a huge shift in equality between men and women. , but this chapter is about money, humiliation, revenge, etc. It has also been abused in various ways.
Section 375
- Rape. — A man is said to commit “rape” if he–
(a) penetrates his penis, to any extent, into the vagina, mouth, urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(b) inserts, to any extent, any object or a part of the body, not being the penis, into the vagina, the urethra or anus of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(c) manipulates any part of the body of a woman so as to cause penetration into the vagina, urethra, anus or any part of body of such woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person; or
(d) applies his mouth to the vagina, anus, urethra of a woman or makes her to do so with him or any other person,
under the circumstances falling under any of the following seven descriptions:
First. Against her will.
Secondly. Without her consent.
Thirdly. With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested, in fear of death or of hurt.
Fourthly. With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
Fifthly. With her consent when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
Sixthly. With or without her consent, when she is under eighteen years of age.
Seventhly. When she is unable to communicate consent.
Explanation 1. For the purposes of this section, “vagina” shall also include labia majora.
Explanation 2. Consent means an unequivocal voluntary agreement when the woman by words, gestures or any form of verbal or non-verbal communication, communicates willingness to participate in the specific sexual act:
Provided that a woman who does not physically resist to the act of penetration shall not by the reason only of that fact, be regarded as consenting to the sexual activity.
Exception 1.A medical procedure or intervention shall not constitute rape.
Exception 2. Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape
*[copied from bare act of IPC]
False cases involving bogus victim
One of the biggest reasons why the rightful victim is not protected is that fake lawsuits are filed with fake lawsuits. Although the new rape laws of 2013 were designed with an exceptionally inclusive approach to bringing justice to rape cases. However, there have still been a number of incidents where rape laws were abused, leading to a number of trivial lawsuits.
The Delhi Women’s Commission (DCW) has released a rather shocking statistic that highlights that 53.2% of rape cases filed with the Police between April 2013 and July 2014 are frivolous. The amendments to rape laws introduced by the Penal Code Amendment Act of 2013 are prone to severe abuse and abuse by women with a bad or hidden motive.
Apart from raising the minimum penalty from seven years to ten years and the maximum penalty from the death penalty, the new Law has increased the age of consent from sixteen to eighteen, provided that this is certain and cannot be determined by circumstantial evidence. While these changes are progressive for the righteous victims, they offer the fakers an opportunity to maliciously abuse it. In the next paragraph, we will discuss the threat of false rape cases that cause injustice to both an innocent accused and a righteous victim.
Threat to men kind
The rise of fraudulent cases came shortly after the 2013 Criminal Code (Amendment) Act expanded the scope of Article 375. Accordingly, only one statement from the victim can imprison a man. Police officials have to abide by the protocol set by the law, Police have to detain the man for the protective measures of the woman, all the investigation takes place later. This position of power afforded to women led to a series of false accusations.
One of the popular cases that was featured on all news channels in 2013 was the “Bathinda Rape Case,” according to the Hindustan Times. The gang rape in a moving car turned out to be false.
She played the victim to frame her boyfriend’s wife, who had him jailed for attempted murder by poking her with HIV-contaminated needles. He was released on bail when he made up the story.
Along with the suspect Gurveer Kaur, 24, the police also arrested Rohtash Kumar, who claimed to have brought the woman to the hospital unconscious. Suspects Gurveer Kaur, Rohtash, Ramesh and Sunil Kumar are charged under 420 (cheating), 195 (false evidence to imprison someone for life), 211 (false charge with intent to injure), and 120-B (criminal conspiracy). of Indian Penal Code (IPC)
The plan also included consensual sex between Gurveer Kaur and Rohtash Kumar to make it easier to prove rape.
A year ago, Gurveer and her boyfriend Sunil Kumar were accused of torturing Sunil’s wife enough to poke her with unsterilized needles that cause HIV-AIDS. The target was blinded by the repeated attack, and on Friday, doctors at the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER) in Chandigarh operated on their eyes.
In January last year, Gurveer and Sunil were charged with attempted murder after the victim’s father brought the matter to the Punjab police chief. In Abohar prison, they befriended Rohtash and Ramesh and made them partners in the conspiracy.
“All four suspects, including Sunil Kumar, who was in prison, are now suspects in the fake gang rap case,” police inspector general Nirmal Singh Dhillon said on Monday. “A hunt has begun for Ramesh. Gurveer Kaur and Rohtash have consensual sex to prove rape and put their enemies behind bars.”
A 75-year-old man was recently prosecuted for raping a woman far below his age (see here), the 75-year-old man who lost his wife was so old he could barely walk. accused of raping a young woman. He was sentenced to 6 months in prison for this act, after which he was released on bail, but still humiliated by his children, friends and relatives on charges of rape. But he finally found justice when the court learned the truth after the women who accused him admitted in his testimony that it was done for money and property. Although he finally finds justice, looking at this whole incident, nothing can be done but to mourn what this old man went through during his 6-month detention and humiliation. never committed.
BBC News also ran an article about a 44-year-old real estate agent named Gupta accused of rape by a woman he was dating to show some properties, the women turned out to be coerced by a real employee. The real estate agent he caught embezzling money. It took 8 months, even though he left the case after his innocence was proven. And during these eight months, Gupta lost any shred of social standing he had; His family also suffered.
The victim of a false rape accusation is just as bad as the rape victim. No one can imagine the shock, trauma, ridicule and humiliation she went through after being falsely accused of rape. Not only men, but also their families or relatives are exposed to various consequences, isolation and ridicule are a few of them. Her future is shattered, and the humiliation and disgrace society faces are enough to break anyone until they can’t even think of living the way they used to.
These cases mentioned above are just a few examples of how miserably men suffer because of a gender-neutral law. This scenario might make everyone in the world wonder what’s really going on in the world’s largest democracy, ‘India’. These fake rape cases filed are not only a threat to men but also act as a parasite for our country as they increase India’s Crime Rate and discredit our country around the world.
Recent false rape case
As discussed above, not every rape victim is genuine, there are those who maliciously file false lawsuits. This makes it difficult for legislators to introduce any changes to rape-related laws. One of the criticisms against extending the definition of rape beyond influence is that rape is made an excessive crime and can result in a devaluation of sanctions.
In 2020, the Kerala High Court released the latter on bail after expressing dissatisfaction that a woman had filed a false rape complaint against a health inspector. As a result, the health inspector was kept behind bars for seventy-seven days. The complaint is made under 323 (voluntarily causing serious injury), 506(i) (criminal intimidation), 376, 376(2)(n) and 376C(b) (rape) of Indian Penal Code. But she later retracted the same thing, saying it was consensual sex, not rape.
[Vishnu Tiwari v. State of U.P.]
Rape is a very sensitive matter in India which is dealt today. India has provision if a female gets rapped but don’t have provision if a female rune someone’s life in false rape case. Same was seen in the case of Vishnu Tiwari who spent his 20 years in prison for offence which he didn’t committed.
As rightly quoted,
“It is better that ten guilty escape than one innocent suffers”.
-William Blackstone
Facts
Vishnu Tiwari, a person in a village of UP’s Lalitpur district was sent to jail for 20 years in a false rape case. When he was arrested, he was 23 years old and after twenty years Allahabad High court has passed the judgement that he is innocent and he had not committed any crime. He was 23 years old when he was arrested and now, he is 43 years old.
In the case, Tiwari was 23 when the woman was first apprehended in September 16, 2000, based on an FIR filed by her husband and father-in-law. She was accused of sexual harassment, rape and beating while she was five months pregnant.
The girl who accused Vishnu Tiwari of rape was from the same village and said that he attacked her on her way to work.
Subsequently, he was charged with rape and brutality under the SC/ST Act. Tiwari was released on parole, but was arrested once again in 2001. He served as a non-commissioned officer for two years before being sentenced to life imprisonment by the Lalitpur court in 2003. Sentenced to ten years in prison for rape under Sections 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code. Vishnu’s troubles did not end there; He was sentenced to life imprisonment after being found guilty under sections 3(1)(7) and 3(2)(5) of the SC/ST Brutality Act.
Tiwari tried to have her conviction reversed by a court in 2005, but her appeal was found erroneous as all relevant documents were missing. It stayed that way for the next 16 years.
According to Tiwari, the lawsuit resulted from a land and animal dispute. He had never met the woman and only knew her as a bahu. “All they wanted was money from him under the Harijan law,” and he never thought he would have to spend the next 20 years in jail because of his greed.
Judgement
Court of Justice Kaushal Jayendra Thaker and Gautam Chowdhary mentioned this when ordering the release of a Vishnu in the Allahabad High Court acquittal decision.
“The most unfortunate aspect of this case is that the appeal was preferred over jail,” he said in the ruling. “The matter remained flawed for 16 years, so we don’t normally talk about flawed appeal numbers, but we talked about the same.”
According to the high court, the medical findings did not show any signs of sperm and forced sexual intercourse. “We discover one more fact: Despite the prosecutor’s accusation of rape, there are no injuries in the private parts of the lady, despite the fact that she is a fully grown woman who is pregnant and said to have been battered,” the court said. “Furthermore, there was reason on the plaintiff’s side that the parties were in a land dispute.
It also turned out that there were some inconsistencies in the FIR’s original filing, which was a false rape claim. This failure to investigate reflects badly on the police, who refuse to conduct a thorough investigation and dismiss the allegation as unfounded.
The court went on to say that there were some inconsistencies in the testimonies of victims and witnesses based on its previous findings. We couldn’t ignore the fact that an innocent man lost 20 years for a crime he didn’t commit.
What is section 498A of IPC?
Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with violence perpetrated on women after marriage by their husband, mother-in-law or any relative of the husband. It imposes 3 years punishment and a fine. This gives a new definition to brutality. Brutality can be defined as: –
- If the action is of such a nature as to induce the woman to commit suicide or self-harm, which could be fatal. This is included after Shobha Rani v. Medhukar Reddy case. It was made in the case where evidence is needed to prove persecution.
- If any unlawful demand is made or done for harassing wife or any person related to her.
Misuse of law
The Supreme Court Calls Article 498A ‘Legal Terrorism’. Abuse or abuse of the law is mostly perpetrated by urban and educated women. Also, in most cases, the husband and two of his relatives are also prosecuted.
- Women use it more as a weapon than to protect themselves. In Arnesh Kumar v. Bihar State case, it was revealed that incapacitated grandparents and even their relatives living abroad were arrested. So women started using their husbands as a weapon to get them arrested if they were dissatisfied. There is a large number of false cases filed each year, which increases the waiting time of cases in the courts.
- There have been several cases where the man was not from India and came to India to marry the lady. Due to the fear of extortion and imprisonment, he is made to do things he would not do otherwise. Male is under the fear of Section 498A.
- The police visit the men’s office buildings and their reputation is tarnished. The police can also take relatives if the complaint is damaged. It also does not require any proof before being arrested. It doesn’t even need an investigation. So, if there is a small disagreement, the woman can use the division to take revenge.
- Gifts are sometimes misunderstood as dowry. So, this can again cause problems.
Therefore, pro-women laws should not become anti-male laws.
National Criminal Record Bureau publishes “All India Crime Data” every year. Cases registered under article 498A are increasing every year, but the conviction rate is decreasing every year. The conviction rate under Section 498A is ¼ of the total crime conviction rate.
What is Section 125 of Cr. PC?
“The child support scheme of spouses, children and parents” are dealt under Section 125 of the Cr. PC. In this section, the names of those who are entitled to receive alimony, the materials required to claim and receive alimony, and the order of the first-class magistrate are given.
False case under 498A IPC, 125 Cr. PC, which lead to cruelty against men.
Rishi Pal vs Luxmi Devi and another on 27.08.2009
Appeal was made by the appellant that is husband is directed against the judgement and the decree which was dated on 25th September 1998, where learn additional district judge, Jagadhri vide which the petition was filed by the appeal and under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act which was ordered to be dismissed.
A petition was filed by plaintiff under section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act on the pleading, it was held that parties were married according to Hindu rites on 18th April 1984, at village malakpur Bangar. Apart from the state of being married, one female child, who was eight near about 12 years on the day when the petition was presented, was born and was living with the husband. Relations between the parties became tense in 1992, as the defendant-spouse began to visit her parents’ house very often unnecessarily and sometimes even without the plaintiff’s consent. The appellant became suspicious, and in mid-September 1992, when the defendant was at his parent’s home, the appellant also went there and learned that he was at the home of defendant number 2 and found them in a house, compromising position. Despite his arrest, he did not give up his activities and continued to go to his parents’ home and resided there with the defendant number 2. He claimed that the defendant-wife was leading a life of adultery. In addition, the appellant’s situation is that after the appellant’s wife-defendant told her parents about her illegitimate relationship with defendant number 2, she began to hate the appellant and could not be brought back despite all efforts in her marriage house. It has been argued that the defendant-wife left the plaintiff-husband.
The defendant-spouse also brought an action against the appellant, acquitting under Article 498-A of the IPC. Defendant-spouse is also subject to Section 125 Cr.PC. Upon notice, both defendants adjusted the case to the appellant. The defendant-spouse claimed that 1.00 lac was spent for the marriage. She denied the allegations made by him. The plaintiff allegedly was a drunkard and argued with him over very minor matters. It was the plaintiff who made his life hell. In 1992, she denied going to his parents’ house too often. She also denied the allegations of adultery. It was alleged that the appellant claimed Rs.20,000/-, his father brought a panchayat and paid the appellant Rs. 10000 the appellant agreed to keep his wife with him. However, after staying in the marriage house for 20 days, she was expelled from the house again. The case filed in the defense was that the appellant was dissatisfied with the defendant-wife as she could not give birth to a son. The escape allegations were denied. However, she admitted that she had lodged a complaint against the applicant under IPC Section 498−A. The defendant-spouse claimed that fraternity intervened and the issue was reconciled. As stated earlier, other claims have been denied. Defendant No. 2 also denied the allegation of adultery.
The Civil Court of First Instance evaluated the evidence and decided on the cases of adultery and desertion against the plaintiff. The court also found that the allegations of persecution were unfounded and the issue of persecution was decided against the appellant.
On the subject of adultery, the court decided that the appellant approved the act of adultery according to the allegations and evidence, and that there were differences in the claims and evidences in this regard, therefore, the statement of the appellant was not believed. The Civil Court of First Instance determined that it was the plaintiff who was at fault regarding the desertion. The learned Court did not believe the letter that was given as a basis to prove the fugitive.
Learning about the persecution issue, the Marriage Court stated that the defendant-spouse did not support the prosecution case due to the panchayat’s interference, so the false prosecution allegations were not proven.
This decision of the Learned Marriage Court is inadmissible. It may be recognized that a criminal case brought against the appellant which resulted in his acquittal is admissible. It has also been proven in the records that the parties did not live together afterwards. Therefore, it cannot be said that the defendant did not support the case because of the agreement between the parties. Dharam Pal Vs. Smt. Pushpa Devi, AIR 2006 Punjab and Haryana 59 is pleased to say that when his wife lodges a complaint and the allegations made by his wife are found to be unfounded, then the wife will be guilty of wrongfully prosecuting her husband, which amounts to cruelty. It is well-understood law that filing a false criminal case against a spouse is an act of cruelty and the spouse has the right to decide on a divorce based on his or her suffering. It is also undisputed and substantiated according to the records that the defendant-wife lived in the parent’s home and left the little girl in her husband’s custody. This behavior of the defendant-wife which lead to mental and physical cruelty, as it affected his performance of duty, was decided by the Court in Balbir Kaur Vs. Daljit Singh, 1997(2) RCR (Civil) 121 and Raj (Smt.) Vs. Dalbir Singh, 1997 (2) All India Hindu Law Correspondent 82.
This Court in case of Raj (Smt.) Vs. Dalbir Singh (supra) has laid down as under: −
“5. After hearing the defendant’s lawyer who took to the evidence in the minutes, I am of the opinion that the findings recorded by the trial court are indisputable and the present appeal is devoid of any merit. In his petition, the husband claimed that the wife was a moody woman and had repeatedly mistreated him and his family members. He did not put forward any examples of bad behaviour in his petition and did not bring any evidence in this regard. The general defense that the wife is constantly misbehaving is rather vague and not sufficient to justify that the husband has been cruelly treated. Regarding her escape request, she stated that she had been kicked out of the house after being beaten while his wife appeared to be RW1. At the head examination, she did not indicate that the husband or family members ever wanted a dowry. Apart from his statement, there is no evidence in the records that she was kicked out of the house as she claimed. Surprisingly, on her way to her parents’ house, she left behind a daughter who was raised by her father. On the other hand, the husband entered the witness stand as PW1 and stated that his wife left him without sufficient reason and took panchayats to his parents’ house to bring him back but refused to come back with him. His version was supported by other witnesses.
The court was right in finding that the applicant had left her husband without sufficient reason. According to his wife, she had left home about four years before the petition was filed. As a result, the findings recorded by the trial court were confirmed. Consequently, there was no justification for the appeal and the same case was dismissed without any order of costs.” For this reason, even if the reason for desertion and adultery was not proven, the appellant was given the right to decide on divorce due to persecution, based on proven facts.
This appeal is allowed, the decision and decision made by the learned Marriage Court is nullified and the petition filed by the appellant husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act is allowed, but there is no order regarding costs.
Opinion
Therefore, some deficiencies in the system cause us to conclude that our system needs to be changed urgently. The fundamentals of the criminal justice system, including the police, courts and justice system, need to be improved. Investigations must change, regulations must be strictly followed and the judiciary must play a more prominent role. There should be regular inspections for cases appealed, and the prison authority should vigorously pursue the commutation of sentences for long-term incarcerated persons. To sum up, every part of the criminal justice system must work together to ensure that no innocent citizen feels the burden of our system’s shortcomings.
