Black September – For Indian Men in 2018
“September 2018 would always be remembered as ‘Black September’ in the lives of Indian Men.”
Individuals today, mostly females, are proud to be ‘feminists’. But what exactly is feminism? How is it defined? If at all you ask this, all will give a different answer. The only common factor among all these definitions would be that it has something to do with ‘females’. When explored, people who call themselves feminists, were of many different and often contradicting views. While some would say women are superior to men, others would say women are equal to men. While some would want women favouring laws, others would want women protection laws, yet others would want equal laws for men and women. While some people think women behind the veils are not liberalized, others think women in burkhas are not liberalized. While some demand police protection, others demand protection from the police. Only God can understand what exactly ‘feminism’ actually stands for…
Irrespective of the fact that whatever the definition of feminism may be; under the garb of this very hollow feminism and in the name of women empowerment, this September, India witnessed 4 major blows to the rights and dignity of men because of following:
Hon’ble Supreme Court reviewed it’s own Judgement of “Rajesh Sharma vs State of UP” and removes “Family Welfare Committee” in cases dealing with Matrimonial Cruelty u/s IPC 498A
Central Government cleared “The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance 2018” Announcing giving Triple Talaq BY HUSBAND ONLY as Non-Bailable offence along with other penalties too
Hon’ble Supreme Court decriminalized IPC 497 #Adultery
Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed entry of women to #Sabrimala Shrine
Both the above announcements/judgments have used the same Statement as the reasoning for making/changing the pre-September 2018 scenario.
Whereas the Hon’ble Supreme Court used the logic that “since it is impermissible, hence we are removing it”; the Central Government’s action reads, “though it is impermissible, we are still making it more draconian”.
Supreme Court reviewed “Family Welfare Committee” w.r.t. Rajesh Sharma vs State of UP:
A three Judges bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice of India, removed the Family Welfare Committees (FWC) which were made as per the guidelines issued by a 2 Judges Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of “Rajesh Sharma vs State of UP”. The Hon’ble Supreme Court said that such guidelines or committee cannot be made by Judiciary.
Daaman expresses it’s grief on the review done by the Court for following reasons:
Mediation inside Mahila Thana or CAW Cells was always a very Anti-Male procedure, which was generally done more as forced interrogation and not reconciliation/Mediation process. FWC was filling this gap by making the process more Humane and unbiased for a Husband.
The earlier judgment has already taken the work of reviewing the same Guidelines within 6 months so any further review ought not have been taken up.
FWC was helpful to a great extent as it was able to bring down the load of the Indian Courts for False Matrimonial cases and plethora of Anticipatory Bail cases.
FWC was also able to ensure that IPC 498A, which has earned it’s nicknames of Legal Terrorism, Assassin’s Weapon and similar names by the magnitude of it’s misuse, is to some extent controlled in unnecessarily dragging innocent Husband and Families into Criminal Procedure on basis of mere allegations.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court also removed the part of earlier order which allowed the Magistrate to not force all accused to be present in person in IPC 498A. Removal of this clause as well brings in lot of Harassment to IPC 498A accused, who are already fighting a Criminal case, which has lowest conviction rate of about 12% and highest misuse rate as well.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court agreed on the huge amount of misuse of IPC 498A and also referred to Justice Malimath Committee report along with Rajya Sabha Committee report and talked about the need to curb the menace of misuse, it still ventured out to close FWC.
FWC was not the first time that Hon’ble Supreme Court has formed quasi-Judicial Committees. It had done the same in various other judgments including the judgments of Vishakha (Workplace Harassment), Delhi sealing drive committee along with many others. So making a FWC was very much constitutional, if making ICC in Vishakha Judgment or making of Sealing Committee in Sealing drive in Delhi was constitutional.
Daaman is evaluating various legal options on the review judgment.
Government of India passed the Triple Talaq Ordinance:
India has now become the first country across the globe where a man could be jailed for a Civil dispute of Divorce. This reality has now happened for Muslim men and without knowing the details, implications of the same, it is unfortunate that such an Ordinance has been pushed onto Indian Men.
As per the Ordinance, a man can be jailed for 3 years for giving instantaneous Triple Talaq (talaq-e-biddat) either orally, written, electronic form or any other manner whatsoever.
This Ordinance was absolutely wrongly conceived since the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already held talaq-e-biddat as Unconstitutional in Shayara Bano vs Union of India. When this particular Triple Talaq is void ab-initio, bringing in Penal provision is absolutely unacceptable.
Also, Divorce/Talaq are civil laws and remedies. By the Ordinance, Divorce cases have been moved out of Ambit of Family Courts and thus the concept of Family Court has been questioned.
This Ordinance has far reaching implications on Indian Society:
Inspite of specific sections dealing with Maintenance and Custody of the Child, the Ordinance brings in clear violation of the Constitution of India via this Double Jeopardy
This Ordinance actually means that a Muslim Husband can be Jailed for filing a wrong Divorce Petition (talaq-e-biddat, post Supreme Court Judgment, is a Wrong Divorce Petition as it is void ab-initio)
Once a Husband is Jailed, does the Ordinance save a family? Is it right to expect OR FORCE a Husband to stay with a wife who got the person Jailed?
Daaman strongly opposes this Ordinance and requests the government to withdraw this Ordinance to maintain the sanctity of Civil Law which governs marital relationships.
Supreme Court strikes down #Adultery IPC 497:
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in a 5 judges bench, headed by Chief Justice of India, decriminalized Adultery thus making Sexual relationship outside the Marriage not a Criminal Offence.
With the way the definition and reality of Marriage has changed in India, where Husbands were forced to live under constant fear of False Dowry, Maintenance, Domestic Violence, Custody cases, Adultery law was the only protection they had in case of adulterous wife filling false bouquet of cases. That shield, which could have helped Husband prove the Cruelty he has undergone because of Wife’ Adultery has been taken off and Husbands are left defenceless.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court while pronouncing the judgment mentioned that Husband is not a Master of the wife. Daaman wishes to submit an amendment that, No Spouse is Master of Other Spouse. It is highly unfortunate that though the Husband is not a Master of Wife, but still the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed archaic and draconian laws like Maintenance, Alimony laws which force the Husband to be the PROVIDER to his wife.
With the removal of Adultery law, which gave 100% immunity to an Adulterous wife, now wife will have no deterrent in having Sexual Relationship outside her marriage. It would be pertinent to add that a Husband, if at all, even talks to another female (or doesn’t even do that much), a wife has all the right to file Criminal Case on her Husband (and his entire family members) under IPC 498A, CrPC 125, PWDVA 2005 and many other sections.
It had been our demand for long time that Adultery law MUST be amended to make it Gender Neutral. With Hon’ble Supreme Court doing away with the law inspite of correcting it, the value of Marriage has been left to nothing in India. Now the big question remains, WILL A CHILD EVER BE SURE WHO IT’S FATHER IS?
Supreme Court allows entry of women (specific age group) in Sabarimala:
Entry of women between 10-50 years of age was not allowed in the shrine of Sabrimala, which is considered to be the abode of Celibate Lord Ayyappa. Interestingly, a religious sentiment case, was conveniently converted and viewed as a Feminist Issue which means that Feminists don’t regard females under 10 years and over 50 years as women at all.
Hon’ble Supreme Court 5 judges bench, headed by Chief Justice of India, also used terms like “Patriarchy”, “Women not inferior to Men” etc. Though, the case was never a Gender based case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court verdict made it like one.
Daaman believes in religious autonomy to remain untouched by Judiciary but would request the Hon’ble Supreme Court to also issue directions to Attukal Temple, Chakkulathukavu Temple, Santoshi Maa ‘Vrat’, Lord Brahma Temple (Pushkar), Bhagati Maa Temple (Kanyakumari), Mata Temple (Muzaffarpur), Trimbakeshwar Temple, Kamrup Kamakhya Temple TO ALLOW MEN INSIDE THESE TEMPLES FOR THE SAME EQUALITY.
Daaman, thus, would be taking following actions:
Evaluate the Legal options to challenge the court orders
Reach out to all the Members of Parliament to not pass “The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Ordinance, 2018 by sharing detailed response to the said Ordinance
Submit Memorandums to the Government for Formation of “National Commission for Men” so that Men have a Constitutional body which could be much more proactive to take care of the rights and dignity of Men and Boys.
MAKES NEED OF MEN’s COMMISSION MORE AND MORE STRONGER–