First my observation–It is really a burning issue, yet goes neglected in drawing public attention. There are laws to protect women from harassment. It is good as with this we can protect half of mankind to protect our home and hearth. But in real practice, the opposite is happening.
The real powerless women living in far off places, continue to suffer as they do not know of these legal provision, even if they know, they are powerless to make access to justice when needed. Even in this unjust society, all women are not powerless, some of them on the contrary are exploitative by taking advantage of liberal laws made for women protection—that’s why I appended the court observation. The net result is that those who need the laws can’t use it, those who don’t need use it to exploit. Lack of laws to protect women is bad, misusing the law is worse.
I quote an example. In our Housing society, we have a woman of dubious character. She is a nuisance for the whole locality. All know she is bad but none dares to confront her because she threats that she will use women protection laws against them. In fear, people keep a long distance from her, and she rules in the vacuum. She is uneducated, does not allow to happen any development work in our housing society. There are many recorded complaints against her requesting the police to restrain her, but police says they are unable to take action as the offender is a woman. There are many such cases.
If anybody do not believe me, I am willing to hand over the documents to be proved otherwise………in this context, TOI report attracted me, so that you may read and scratch your head. Please read on—
[Remember public fashion does not always lead to GOD. In the thirties and forties in England, no Englishman was considered to be intellectual unless they supported Russia and communists, and disparaged English Govt. Everything English was bad and anything Russian was good to them. Similarly, in our Indian state of West Bengal, in my college days, you would not pass for an intellectual, unless you were a communist and a confirmed/sworn atheist, praised china and abused India fiercely. we had to use words like FASCIST, REVISIONIST, REVOLUTIONARY, BOURGEOISIE, PROLETARIAT etc etc difficult jargon, without understanding their meaning…….similarly, our intellectuals behave in women’s issues, without going into the merit of it, just because supporting a women is progressive !!!!!!!!!!!!!. Time has come to stop this hypocrisy]
- A court commented that no one discusses the “dignity and honour” of men, given that everyone is fighting for the rights, honour and dignity of women.
- The argument came up during while the court was acquitting a rape accused recently.
NEW DELHI: While acquitting a rape accused recently, a court commented that no one discusses the “dignity and honour” of men, given that everyone is fighting for the rights, honour and dignity of women. Besides, it said, laws meant to protect women might be misused by women.
“Perhaps, now it’s the time to take a stand for men,” Nivedita Anil Sharma, special judge of POCSO Act court, said. She found several contradictions in the testimony of the complainant and her parents, pointing out the prosecution’s “miserable failure”.
Noting that victims were now being called “survivors”, the court asked: “An acquitted accused, who has remained in custody for a considerable period during inquiry, investigation and trial, and who has been acquitted honourably, should he now be addressed as a rape case survivor?”
It added: “He may also file any case for damages against the prosecutrix, if advised.”
The 20-year-old rape case had seen anomalies and improvements in statements of its main witnesses, including the complainant. The prosecution had claimed that a minor girl, residing with her parents, was abducted and raped on September 18, 1997.
The complainant had said that the accused would visit her house. On the day of the incident, she claimed to be alone when the accused threatened her and abducted her, only to rape her later.
But the court pointed out that if the girl was being abducted in broad daylight and, that too, in a residential area, why did she not raise an alarm. Additionally, three important aspects — forensic evidence, age of the complainant and day of the incident — were held against the prosecution.
In the absence of medical evidence, coupled with the fact that the victim’s statement had serious inconsistencies, the court could not place trust on her evidence. And when it came to establishing the motive of the accused, the police’s version appeared to be untrue. The court said: “No reason is shown as to why the accused would jeopardise his future.”