As many of you might be knowing, the Supreme Court of India has recently amended the Domestic Violence Act. It now allows the complainant to name women and children as respondents in the complaint, in addition to the husband.
That means, the estranged wife can now target a husband’s mother, sister and children in his family, in addition to him and his father or his brothers.
From a report published on Oct-10-2016 in The Hindu:
In a landmark verdict, the Supreme Court has widened the scope of the Domestic Violence Act by ordering deletion of the words “adult male” from it, paving the way for prosecution of women and even non-adults for subjecting a woman relative to violence and harassment.
The Supreme Court is doing this because in its opinion, this change fits better with the notion of equality before law.
We believe that this amendment is extremely dangerous, gives even more power to unscrupulous Indian women, and does nothing at all to advance gender equality in India.
Let us explain.
As we have previously pointed out, almost all the domestic laws in India presume that the woman/wife is the victim and that the man/husband is the aggressor. In most such laws, the complainant woman/wife can complain not only against the man/husband, but also against his extended family, and even children in his family.
The misuse of these laws is a severe law-sanctioned cruelty against every married man in this country. It takes a lot of money, effort and time, not to talk about the stress and social humiliation, for a husband to defend his family and himself. In all such laws, the husband and his family is presumed guilty and they have to prove their innocence, flipping the principle of “Innocent until proven Guilty” on its head.
This recent amendment would have been a welcome change IF the court had removed all gender-specificity from the law and allowed any gender to complain against any other gender. As it is, men are STILLbarred from using this law to complain against violence or cruelty perpetrated by their wives.
The only change is that earlier women could only complain against their husbands. Though they could use the draconian and corrupt 498A criminal law against his family, the domestic violence act only allowed her to complain against the man himself. That was a small but measurable relief to a man’s family. In every such case, lawyers charge per person to defend. Each additional respondent means more money for the lawyers, and more trips for aged parents to suffer the humiliation of going to courthouses.
The cruel estranged wives target mothers-in-law and sisters-in-law especially, because they know that targeting the women of the family will break down the husband’s will and make him pay the ransom (called alimony).
Gupta said that the mothers-in-law, who are mostly quite elderly, are the ones who get depressed in jail and adjusting becomes a problem for them.
The nanands or sisters-in-laws who come in jail for few months are mostly aged between 18 and 26 years and also face a lot of difficulty and depression. These women know that their being in jail means they will be ostracised for life in society; they fear that no-one would marry them. It is emotional trauma for them and most are seen crying for days
Moreover, the domestic violence law is used to ask for relief: non-contact, money and maintenance. In almost all cases, the husband is liable to maintain his wife. The elderly and the children are anyway unable to provide any asked-for monetary relief. In these cases, the courts MUST exclude all the extraneous respondents who have been included just at the whim of the complainant. If no relief is asked from them, there is no reason to keep them there, except to enrich the corrupt lawyers.
In this particular case, the Supreme Court has upheld that even minors and elderly women can be named as respondents in a Domestic Violence complaint. This was already possible in the Dowry and related laws. Now a husband’s family has to brace itself for defending itself again under the Domestic violence law as well.
More laws, more money for the lawyers. More burden for the Indian taxpayer.
The feminists are gloating at this “win” for women. But aren’t falsely accused mothers-in-law or sisters-in-law women too? No, according to feminists and Indian courts, any member of a male’s family is a fit target for cruelty to teach the man a “lesson” for his “patriarchy”.
It is perhaps possible for the husband’s mother to hit back at her unscurpulous daughter-in-law by filing a counter case under this law (now that a woman can be a respondent too, Ha!). But we believe that most courts will not entertain cases against errant daughters-in-law. This is because of the inherent bias in Indian courts which regards husbands and their families as aggressors and the “poor” daughter-in-law as an eternal victim.
For men considering getting married in India, we urge you to note this dangerous step in the wrong direction. Understand the risks to your mother, father, and your existing family. These risks are now bigger than ever before.
Beware of an unscrupulous and impulsive woman in India. She now has another state-sanctioned tool to harass your family.
There are four huge problems in India when it comes to being accused of rape:
1. The badly designed laws according to which:
If you dump your girlfriend, she can accuse you of rape.
If you refuse to marry someone after engagement, she can accuse you of rape.
If you pass a lewd remark or send someone a nasty text or Facebook message, she can accuse you of “outraging her modesty” which is treated similar to rape in Indian courts.
If you marry someone against her parents’ wishes, they can accuse you of kidnapping and raping their daughter even though she’s an adult and had a consensual relationship with you.
2. The prevalence of falsehood and perjury and false accusations due to which any woman can accuse you of something that you did not do, had no intention of doing, and of which there is no evidence that you did it. But because of twisted laws and a white-knight constitution and judiciary in India, a woman’s word in presumed to be true and a man has to prove his innocence.
3. The abysmal state of Indian judiciary, the atrocious delays and the lawyer-police mafia due to which if you are accused of something, and even if the burden of proof is on the prosecution, you suffer for years and maybe decades and see your family life, your career and your reputation destroyed.
4. The media-vultures who pounce on any rape or sex-related legal incident as a cash-cow. To them, any such incident is a sure shot way to make money by naming and shaming someone merely accused, and by smearing his name for his lifetime. Media is not concerned about facts and objectivity and due process and protecting the identity of someone who is not yet charged.
The media is so twisted that it will not even publish a woman’s name even after the courts rule that the accusation was false. The media will splash the accusation story all over its front pages. But when the accused in acquitted or it is proved that the accusation was mala-fide and false, it will either not publish the news at all (because it is not entertaining now), or it will make a small mention on an inner page.
So how do you avoid this dangerous minefield which has the potential of destroying your life and reputation?
We offer seven guidelines for the Indian man. Mark our words and follow our guidelines to avoid being pulled into this kind of mess:
Do not date psychos, single-mothers, well-connected women, lawyers, feminists, social activists and NGO-type women. These urban bitches are trigger-happy about going to the police or the courts or the corrupt women’s commissions when they feel like they are not being treated well. By the way, by “psychos” we mean those women who are unstable or are on hormonal or psychiatric medication.
Obviously stay away from women who seem overly greedy and/or manipulative. Stay away from women who have a police officer, a judge, a lawyer, or a high-ranking civil servant in their family.
Do not date a single mom! They are especially vicious if you end the relationship because they were seeing you as their ATM for life.
These kind of women are very “aware” of their rights though they have nil idea of their responsibilities. These women will cite “emotional cruelty” in a heartbeat to get back at you if you refuse to toe their line. They might seem easy lays but beware, you are playing with fire. These women have a chip on their shoulder and are very argumentative and are usually very aggressive. Even if they are pretty, they are unpleasant to be with. Stay away from them.
Record everything. Even if the recordings are not admissible in court, when the time comes and things are going south she should be made aware that you have a lot of evidence. That if she tries any false accusation stunt, you will make sure the stuff finds its way on to the public domain so that society can make its own conclusions. Keep a history of all your text messages, Facebook interactions, call logs, etc. You don’t need to record calls all the time. But you should know how to. If your girlfriend or wife as much as hints at anything legal, start recording immediately from then on.
Have a few lawyer or police officials as friends. Your girlfriend should know that if she tries a false accusation to intimidate you, you will hit back with ten times the force. She should know that you are well-versed in law. That you will not be blackmailed. During your relationship, tell her about the horror stories which illustrate that a woman going to court as a pressure tactic is ruined for life. No man wants to go near her, she doesn’t get anything from the courts, and the courts, lawyers and the police just extract their pound of flesh.
Do not divulge your wealth. Never ever be tempted to brag about how much money or how many assets you have. Don’t talk about your salary or bonus or your savings.
When a relationship goes south, a woman has two incentives to try to hurt you:
Revenge: She wants to see you in pain.
Money: She wants to extort money from you. This is less likely if she doesn’t know how much and where you have the money.
We know that you can’t hide your lifestyle completely. But she should not know about your bank accounts or your list of properties. In fact, when a relationship is going south, keep telling her that you have lost a lot of money in the stock market and that you are anxious about money matters. That your future is not very bright and you might need to take a loan.
On that note, never loan money to your girlfriend. If the relationship goes bad, you can say goodbye to that money.
NEVER start a live-in relationship in India. Courts treat a live-in relationship far more seriously when it comes to “rape on the pretext of marriage” kind of cases. There is no benefit to living together. If you want regular sex, you can spend the night with her but she must go back to her own home. You should not give in to emotional pressure of any kind to allow her to move in with you. Once she is living with you, you are done for. If you have foolishly started living with her, but feel like the relationship is going to get into rough waters, try to find a job in another city. After you move to the new city, slowly cut down communications with her and let her find a new lover in the former city. If you immediately try to finish a relationship after moving, she might get you in trouble.
And it goes without saying that never try to take her to a temple for a sindoor ceremony or a marriage-like ceremony between the two of you. That might be romantic and get you in her pants, but it will bite you back eventually. Trust us on this one. If she is unwilling to put out (have sex with you), leave her instead of trying something like this.
Have a good rapport with her social circle. People should know that you two are in a consensual relationship. If she tries a false accusation, her own social circle will regard her as evil and boycott her. That will act as a big disincentive for her not to get you in trouble. Her social circle should know that you are a nice man. Give thoughtful gifts (books, framed photos, upholstery) to some of her friends so that they have a good feeling about you and that when the relationship is suffering, they do not advise her to go after you legally. You cannot guarantee that she won’t, but it is far less likely if her social circle will judge her harshly for such an act.
Deescalate Situations. If the relationship is almost over, do not try any ego-games with her. Give her a gentle exit. Do not try to be right all the time. Have a plan on letting her down easy. End the relationship gradually and not suddenly. Don’t blame her for anything. What’s the point? If you have decided to end the relationship, might as well leave her with her ego intact. If an argument is getting ugly, do not get into a shouting match. Control your temper and try to diffuse the situation.
We understand that preventing a false-rape accusation is impossible in India, but even so, you can take some precautions to lessen the probability.
Every man in India must understand the way criminal trials work in India, and the steps followed from beginning to end.
There are dozens of ill-drafted, ambiguous, biased and misandrist laws in India. The judicial system is extremely dysfunctional and the process is archaic and in many cases, broken. Only police and lawyers gain from the complexity and the delays, but knowledge is power. You should know what to expect, and then act in ways to minimize your troubles. Troubles will come your way no matter what, because the system is broken. But if you understand it, you will be able to navigate it better.
We want to emphasize that there is no way you can prevent or avoid a false case being slapped on you. You can be innocent, have tons of evidence in your favor, have audio or video recordings, not even be related to the woman, but still she can file a case on you and drag you through police stations and courts for decades.
Go through this two-page PDF (prepared by a law firm, Vaish Associates) and understand the basic definitions and the flow-chart.
If you meet a modern woman who waxes eloquent about being a “strong independent woman” and who is brainwashed with the rhetoric of #YOLO and “my life my choices”, tell her that:
If she is attracted to badboys, she shouldn’t then expect the police to come rescue her when her badboy lover beats her up or treats her like shit.
If she wants to live promiscuously, then she shouldn’t complain when people label her a slut.
If she wants to have affairs, then she shouldn’t complain when no man wants to commit to her.
If she likes to have unprotected sex, then she shouldn’t ask the man or the government for help with her abortion or for child support.
If she likes to roam around drunk at night, she shouldn’t complain when strangers try to take advantage of her.
If she says that she doesn’t need no man to take care of her, she should change her own flat tire on the road.
If she believes in gender equality, she should not abuse gender-biased laws like the marital cruelty law or the domestic violence law which offer relief only to women..
If she falls in love with a man, has sex with him, and he refuses to marry her, she should not run to the courts yelling “rape on the pretext of marriage!”
If she wears revealing clothes, she shouldn’t complain when men ogle at her.
If she doesn’t believe in dowry, then she shouldn’t insist on alimony.
But we know that as soon as you mention any of these “should”s, the strong independent woman will fly into a rage and call you a woman-hater, a misogynist and a rape-apologist.
Poor her. We are only suggesting that bad choices have bad consequences, and that if she is free to make bad choices, then she should know the consequences and leave others free to not take care of her when the shit hits the fan.
Don’t impose the costs of your behavior on others.
Indian laws are so numerous and so confusing that anybody can be prosecuted as a criminal if the state so chooses. But of all the badly-designed and nanny-state laws, these six seem to us the most misused, the most destructive of individual happiness and freedom, and the most violative of basic rights of a citizen in a civilized country:
IPC 498A: “Cruelty to wife”! Cruelty to anyone is already a crime under law. Why do we need this law? This law is the most misused law in the history of this country to jail countless men, their families and then to extort money from them to “settle” the case.
The Dowry Prohibition Act: Exchange of money or favors between spouses or their families at the time of wedding or afterward has been made illegal by the Indian state. Remember, coercion and intimidation are already crimes under law. Why do we need this law? If a woman’s family is not willing to pay the dowry, let her not get married. If she is criminally harassed after the marriage, she can go to the police or her relatives for help. There are sound sociological reasons for the custom of dowry and to make this exchange a criminal offense is state interference into the personal affairs of people.
SC/ST Atrocities Act: Cruelty and atrocity is already a crime. Why do we need this law? This law is used to silence people if they want to criticize anyone with a particular caste.
The Law on Hurting of Religious Sentiments: This law is used to punish anybody who manages to say or express something which is offensive to anyone for religious reasons. These kinds of laws only exist in medieval, fundamentalist countries which outlaw blasphemy etc.
Sedition Law: This law is misused to prosecute and jail anybody who dares to criticize the government or tries to convince people that their rulers are not gods.
The Contempt of Courts Act: This law makes it illegal for people to publicly disagree with a court’s judgment and to ascribe motives to the judiciary.
Many of these laws were used by the British to punish a servile Indian population, but the free government of India hasn’t left any stone unturned to go further than the British to create laws which punish the citizens for what makes someone else unhappy.
India will not be a free and civilized country till such laws which are based on somebody getting offended or hurt are done away with.
For the last two weeks we have been observing the case of Delhi’s Jasleen Kaur who accused Sarvjeet Singh, another Delhi resident, of eve-teasing and verbal abuse on a traffic junction. It has been the story of rise and fall of Jasleen Kaur. Within a week she has gone from being a “braveheart” to publicity-monger and false-accuser. We thank God for that.
For those who are not aware of the case of Jasleen Kaur, here is our detailed coverage.
On the evening of August 23, 2015, Jasleen Kaur clicked a picture of the man named Sarvjeet Singh on a traffic junction in Delhi and posted it on Facebook, writing in her post that the man verbally abused her and passed obscene remarks at her. The post quickly went viral on social media. Meanwhile, she had also lodged a complaint with Delhi police about the incident.
Jasleen Kaur, a resident of Tilak Nagar in west Delhi, told police that Sarabjeet Singh (28) had made lewd remarks after stopping his bike as she was crossing the road near the Tilak Nagar Metro station and had mischievously offered to drop her at her destination. When she clicked his photo on her mobile phone, she said he had posed defiantly and threatened her, saying, “Jo kar sakti hai kar le. Complaint karke dikha, fir dekhiyo kya karta hun main (File a complaint and see what I’m capable of).”
Notice that ToI already assumed that the man was pervert and that the woman was the victim despite there being no investigation, no evidence, nor any eye-witness in favor of the reported eve-teasing and abuse. A shitty piece of journalism by The Times of India. But this was just the beginning of the ugly media-trial of Sarvjeet Singh.
While the accused Sarvjeet Singh who was being publicly defamed on social media and was arrested from his residence, the Aam Aadmi Party leader and the CM of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal (@ArvindKejriwal) tweeted the following on August 24:
Congratulate @jasleenkaur89 for her bravery. Girls of Delhi should follow her & speak up against such unacceptable acts
Times Now, another media outlet of the psychopathic Times Group who also own The Times of India held a “debate” with their infamous clown journalist Arnab Goswami. Below is the full video of The Newshour debate followed by our observations.
First of all, we are happy to see that the video has over two thousand “dislikes” against less than a hundred “likes”. It sort-of restores our faith in the educated public in this godforsaken land. Go ahead and give “thumbs-down” to it after reading this post.
How this circus of a show by Arnab Clown Goswami is called debate is beyond us. He already has his mind made up about which side is right. He in his loudmouth fashion calls Jasleen Kaur the “braveheart” and congratulates her right at the outset, and the entire show is about him and those on his side silencing the other side. It is anything but debate.
We couldn’t help but observe Jasleen Kaur, who was all decked up to garner attention. Red dress, untied hair, face brimming with smiles like she could not contain her excitement. An astute observer of human nature and body language would not fail to see a woman who was living her dream on that show.
Too much eye-blinking on part of Jasleen Kaur is a strong tell of lying.
At 15:35 Jasleen Kaur says “Why did he comment on my genitals and what he would do to me tonight.” On no other channel, and in no other interview has she mentioned about the man commenting on her genitals. It makes one wonder what prompted her to come up with that accusation about the man only on this particular show. We are of the strong opinion that the idea about the man commenting on her genitals is put in her head by the penalist Aditi Mittal who first mentioned “sexual organs” at 6:06, and Arnab Clown Goswami who mentions “threats in sexual manner with innuendoes” at 14:36. Jasleen Kaur just seems to pick up on everything they are saying.
When Clown Arnab asks his opponent Deepika Bhardwaj to speak he also says, “anyone feel free to come in, by the way”, thus encouraging others to interrupt her. Why? Because she is going to talk sense which might weaken his position in the so-called debate.
Look at Jesleen Kaur’s facial expression and eye movement at 25:15 when Clown Arnab is saying “when a woman who has faced a physical threat, and she has, Jasleen has faced a physical threat..” She herself is surprised by Clown Arnab’s account of what she has faced and her body language thoroughly betrays her. We have made a GIF image of the clip below, observe her eyes closely.
Favoring the media-trial, at 51:15 Sofia Ashraf says: “If a man is being raped, if a man is being abused, we would still come up with a same kind of approach.” Really? So where are you hiding now that the whole world knows that Jasleen Kaur was lying? Why has Times Now not held another “debate” with the eye-witness involved in the case?
Towards the end Clown Arnab mocks the Delhi police commissioner’s statement on the increasing number of rape cases (July 2011), that said: “You can not drive alone at 2 o’clock in the morning on Delhi’s roads and then claim that the capital is unsafe. You should always take your brother or your male driver with you. These are reasonable precautions that are expected to be by all citizens of the city.” At one point in the discussion Arnab Clown Goswami called Ritwik Bisaria to be living in Alice-In-Wonderland world for not seeing the “plight” of women. We think if Clown Arnab can’t see the soundness of this advice, which basically says “do not play with fire if you don’t want to get burned” then it is he who is living in Alice-In-Wonderland world. One must be living in a utopia to expect a world where women (or men for that matter) can roam around alone at night without fear of being robbed/assaulted/raped.
The most hilarious part of the show is this: At 35:20 Kamal Faruqui comes in and says: “First of all, hats off to my daughter Jasleen… She is a proud daughter of all of us…” And guess what, he is lashed out by Aditi Mittal and then insulted by Arnab Clown Goswami for addressing Jasleen Kaur as daughter! They did not hear what the man was actually saying. He was on their side, for God’s sake! The old man is shocked and dithers saying: “You are objecting to my wording… What is wrong with you?” We feel sorry for the poor old man.
Below is the GIF image of the clipping we mentioned above. Jasleen Kaur herself is surprised by Clown Arnab’s account of what she has faced and her body language thoroughly betrays her. Look at her facial expression and eye-movement as Clown Arnab is saying “Jasleen has faced a physical threat..”
When the accused Sarvjeet Singh got bail, Times Now showered more insults on him by calling him names while praising Jasleen Kaur using adjectives like “braveheart”.
The following video of a Times Now reporter talking to Sarvjeet Singh is an epitome of shitty journalism. It reveals how abysmal is the quality of journalism in the mainstream Indian media.
The woman journalist, whose name is Pooja Shali from Times Now, is clearly a stupid feminist bitch with a mountain of prejudice in her head in place of brains. She constantly keeps repeating “there is evidence”, referring to the photograph Jasleen Kaur has taken. How in the hell is the photograph in which the man is nicely posing for it an evidence that he eve-teased and abused Jasleen Kaur who took the photo? The stupid journalist Pooja Shali is hellbent on extracting an apology from Sarvjeet Singh, and when Sarvjeet refuses to apologize she calls it shameful.
On August 25, an eye-witness came forward who gave a completely different account of the incident, overturning Jasleen Kaur’s story. Zee News later aired a show where the channel invited Jasleen Kaur, Sarvjeet’s mother and the eye-witness Vishwajeet for a discussion. Below is the official video of that discussion.
This video is a nail on the coffin of Jasleen Kaur’s badly-earned, short-lived fame.
At 3:00, the eye-witness Vishwajeet says that Jasleen Kaur was controlling traffic at the junction, and it was Jasleen who stopped Sarvjeet. He can’t use the words that she used at Sarvjeet when the scuffle took place between them.
At 8:40, when Jasleen is describing the conversation that was exchanged between herself and Sarvjeet, she says that by having to repeat it again and again she forgets what was exchanged. How dumb! Having to repeat the conversation, if anything, would make one remember everything word for word. Her saying that repetition is making her forget the conversation is nothing but her attempted justification for inconsistencies in her account which she is making up in her mind. And let us state again, apart from The Newshour on Times Now where Aditi Mittal and Arnab Clown Goswami planted ideas in her mind and words in her mouth she has never mentioned that the man remarked about her genitals.
At 9:10 as the eye-witness Vishwajeet starts speaking, Jasleen Kaur is getting ready to run away and the anchor has to tell her that if she is right she must face the questions.
Upon this Jasleen Kaur gets hyper and starts with her dramatics and accuses the channel of shoddy journalism. A show where an eye-witness is present and both sides are being allowed to speak is unfair. But just a day before where only one side was passing verdicts on Sarvjeet Singh and publicly shaming the man without a shred of evidence against him was fine!
At 10:52, agitated Jasleen Kaur says: “You can’t do a media-trial. Let the courts decide..” Wow! This is fucking A! This was exactly the plea of the other side on The Newshour where the man was being vilified through media-trial. But it was alright then. Jasleen Kaur in her agitation has acted so dumb that anyone with slightest common sense can see through her inconsistencies and self-contradictions to figure out that she is a conniving liar.
Turns out, Jasleen Kaur had agreed to appear on the show on a condition that she will not face the eye-witness, Sarvjeet or his family members. Why? Because it scares the shit out of her, facing the truth. That’s why.
So why did Jasleen Kaur lie?
Sarvjeet Singh and his family members have alleged that she did it for political mileage as she is an Aam Aadmi Party activist. While we don’t completely support this theory, we think it can’t be ruled out. Here is why:
All the above facts combined make a strong basis for the suspicion that she pulled this stunt for publicity and political gain. However, in conclusion we would be generous and say that we don’t really know whether she lied to gain political mileage.
Our view is that she was volunteering for controlling traffic at Delhi’s Tilak Nagar traffic junction (as evidenced by the above screenshots) when she had a scuffle with Sarvjeet Singh over him trying to jump the red light. She tried to stop him, he did not listen (which happens every day with men). In her frustration she thought of using her woman power by giving it eve-teasing and sexual harassment angle. With her political and media connections and her social media savviness she knew exactly what kind of power she held.
That is why, in our considered opinion, Jasleen Kaur lied.
And she is not the first. We have written about Rohtak Sisters and Delhi’s Ramanjeet Kaur cases, both of which are quite similar in that the media went crazy showering praises on the supposed victims (women), the men’s lives were ruined, and then the women were found to be lying.
Thus, we conclude that modern women are bitches and media is their pimp.
So in the latest salvo against men, the central government in India is planning a sex offender registry. Given the record of gender equality in law in India, it is no surprise at all that the list will only contain people involved in “crimes against women”.
But an even more appalling part of this development is that people will be included in this registry even when they haven’t been convicted.
The TOI has learnt that the home ministry’s preliminary discussions on the names to be placed in the sex offenders list had some legal experts objecting to “naming and shaming” of sex offenders at the chargesheet stage. There was a view that it would be a rather unfair arrangement were the cases against the charged offenders to end up in acquittal.
“The legal experts felt it would cause irreparable harm to the reputation, besides affecting livelihood of an accused who is ultimately found by the court to be innocent/wrongly implicated,” a home ministry officer said adding that the general outlook during the discussions had favoured uploading of names of only those convicted for sexual crimes.
However, it now seems that this opinion has been overruled and the home ministry does not feel it necessary to wait for the due legal process to be over to educate the public about sex offenders around them. “The name can be removed once the charged person is acquitted. But until then, the purpose of alerting people will be served,” said an officer.
Only when it comes to feminist laws, and especially in India, is an accused considered guilty until proven innocent.
Everybody knows that in India, a woman just has to lodge a complaint with the police for the man’s name to be splashed in the media, and he and his family intimidated and arrested by the police. Everybody also know that the police only copies the original complaint as-is and calls it a “charge-sheet”. The charge-sheet and the complaint are usually not worth the paper they are printed on.
But instead of fixing the justice delivery, the government of India wants to make the laws more and more draconian. Criminals aren’t afraid of these laws because the system of criminal justice doesn’t work. But precisely because it doesn’t work properly that it intimidates and coerces innocent men who have to then face decades of trial and humiliation in the Kafkaesque Indian court system.
Feminists in India, like their US counterparts, are only too happy to give extra-judicial punishment to convicted people who had served their sentences:
This will make sure the rapist is shamed. He won’t get a job, or somewhere to live and will be cut off from society. This is a powerful deterrent,” Kumari, who is also a member of the national commission for empowerment of women, told the Guardian.
Yes, and such a man, having nothing to lose, will do what to become a normal member of society again?
We believe that a list of convicted offenders should be available to the public regardless of crime. All crimes are crimes, whether they be against men or against women. And false accusations must be prosecuted with a default punishment equal to that of the original accusation.