Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Monday, November 25, 2024

Human Rights of Women Must Also Be Respected

Posted in: Criminal Law
Tue, Dec 10, 19, 21:07, 5 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 6013
It is most unfortunate and most disgraceful that in India where women is worshipped as Durga, Kali, Gauri etc and where we all show utmost respect to our sister and mother, we don't care to ensure that those men who without being brainwashed in Pakistan by Pakistani Army or ISI or terror leaders

It is most unfortunate and most disgraceful that in India where women is worshipped as Durga, Kali, Gauri etc and where we all show utmost respect to our sister and mother, we don't care to ensure that those men who without being brainwashed in Pakistan by Pakistani Army or ISI or terror leaders like Hafiz Saeed or Syed Salaluddin or Masood Azhar or anyone else and without being trained in any hostile foreign country perpetrate the worst kind of crimes against women which under no circumstances can ever be justified by anyone. Why when rapists gang rape a women turn by turn and then stab her and then set her ablaze still why in our country are our lawmakers always bothered only and only about the human rights of men alone? Why are such rapists and gang rapists not killed like mosquitoes?

Why should any leniency be shown towards such demons? Why is it that in last 15 years just one poor Dhananjoy Chatterjee is hanged on circumstantial evidence alone in 2004 and whose petition was drafted by prisoners of Tihar jail as was pointed by earlier by senior Supreme Court advocate Colin Gonsalves as he could not hire a lawyer even though every year we keep hearing that more than 32,000 to 33,000 rape incidents keep happening? Why is it that from 1982 to 2004 only Ranga and Birla are hanged for rape cum murder and who certainly deserved no mercy?

But what about other rapists cum murderers? Why were they also not hanged for similar crimes? Why the rich and the affluent are able to escape punishment just because they are able to hire a battery of eminent and experienced lawyers to offer thousands of reasons for sparing their client from being sent to the gallows?

Why are our lawmakers not closing all the escape routes in the form of discretion bomb in our IPC which many times mostly saves a rapist from being sent to the gallows? Why there is no mandatory death penalty for rape and gang rape? Why even for repeated offenders we see that there is no mandatory death penalty?

Why are rape trials and trials of other crimes perpetrated against women not conducted most expeditiously? Why do we see inordinate delay in the completion of rape trials and trials of other crimes pertaining to women? Should we be proud of it? Certainly not!

It is heartening to note that while urging for quick disposal of rape cases, Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad on December 8 said that he would write to all Chief Ministers and Chief Justices of the High Courts to complete investigation in cases of rape and those registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act in two months. He also said that the trial of such cases should also be completed within six months. Inordinate delay in completing rape cases has certainly brought disrepute to our legal system and to our judiciary and so what our Union Law Minister has just recently stated is good to read and it must now be earnestly implemented in totality! It brooks no more delay.

While noting that incidents of rape and crimes against women are unfortunate and highly condemnable, Ravi Shankar Prasad asserted quite unequivocally that perpetrators of such heinous crimes will be punished expeditiously through the judicial process. He said that, I am going to write letters to all the chief ministers urging them to complete the investigation within two months in rape and Pocso cases. This is certainly a commendable and courageous step which must be appreciated unequivocally!

Not stopping here, Ravi Shankar Prasad further added that, I will also write to the Chief Justices of all the High Courts to dispose of expeditiously all cases relating to rape and Pocso pending in the Fast Track Courts. He also disclosed that he has also requested the Chief Justice of India to ensure that there is a mechanism for speedy disposal of such cases. His comments assume huge significance as they came in the backdrop of nation-wide outrage and uproar over the alleged gang rape cum murder cases at Hyderabad and Unnao.

While mentioning that 704 Fast Track Courts (FTCs) are currently working across the country, Ravi Shankar Prasad further revealed that 1,023 new FTCs are going to be constituted to try cases of Pocso and rape offences, besides other crimes against women. All such FTCs must be constituted at the earliest. It brooks no more delay now!

It is most concerning that there is an alarming increase in the incidents of rape, gang rape, throwing of acid on women, and many other crimes perpetrated on women. The main reason behind such a meteoric upsurge is that criminals feel that they can get away by doing anything in India as the criminal justice system functions at an excruciatingly glacial pace which only further punished women and accused easily gets bail! Can this be ever justified by any sane person?

We all know that the Unnao rape victim who was gang raped earlier in March and after complaining to police the gang rapists were arrested. But they were released after Allahabad High Court granted them bail. What did it culminate into?

As we all know the gang rapists ensured that they waylaid the rape victim while she was on her way to attend court hearing at Raebareli to testify against the criminals. Why were the gang rapists given bail at the first instance? Why were the rights of accused given precedence over the rights of the women?

Not stopping here, why did the police not provide adequate security to the rape victim? Why were the criminals allowed to easily set her ablaze and stab her? Should no policemen be held accountable in this regard?

Why are such policemen just suspended? Why are they not dismissed from service and why are they not held accountable for the death of the Unnao gangrape victim? Why is there so much of leniency towards those police cops who should have jolly well ensured that the gangrape victim was not left alone and especially when she was going to attend court hearing and testify herself in gang rape case why was she not provided full security?

It is good to learn that just a day after the Chief Justice of India Sharad Bobde said that justice can never be instant and loses its character when it becomes revenge we also got to read what our Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu said that, There cannot be instant justice, but there cannot be constant delays in justice delivery either, else people become restive. Moreover, how can we afford to ignore the time tested dictum that Justice delayed is justice denied? There can be no denying that even the Chief Justice of India – Sharad Bobde is most concerned to see how rapidly crimes against women are increasing in our country and he fully realizes the invaluable importance of combating such crimes on a war footing!

We get to read everyday so many news of even minors being most brutally raped, murdered with her head smashed and what not. But how many times do we read that such rapists, gang rapists and murderers are hanged? Why always we see that the rights of the accused takes precedence over the rights of the women victim? This has to certainly change now if we really want that the people's faith in our judiciary stands intact!

Why should throwing of acid on women not be punished with mandatory death penalty? How can throwing of acid on women be justified on any ground? How can any punishment less than death penalty or at the least life term without any remission which means imprisonment for the whole life not be awarded on all those who throw acid on women or hurt her in grievous manner?

Why are woman's right to safety and her right to life not accorded the highest priority in India? Should we not feel ashamed to see that even those who throw acid on women escape very easily after spending at the most just few years in prison? Why should dowry death not be punished with mandatory death penalty? Why are so many escape routes left open for criminals to escape easily and with just a light punishment even after committing the most horrifying crimes against women?

Why is it that under our penal laws there is no mandatory life imprisonment also for gang rape as stipulated in Section 376D of the IPC? Why the punishment for gang rape as stipulated in Section 376D of the IPC is shall not be less than twenty years but which may extend to life? Why this discretion bomb in form of may is inserted in Section 376D dealing with gang rape?

Should this discretion bomb not be defused promptly by removing it and providing for mandatory death penalty considering the irrefutable fact that gang rape incidents are increasing alarmingly in our country followed by even gang burning of gang rape victims as we saw most recently in Unnao and earlier in Hyderabad with a 26-year-old veterinary doctor? Can gang rape be justified under any circumstances? Why then do we see that there is no mandatory death penalty for such offences?

Why different punishment prescribed for gang rape on woman under 16 years of age as prescribed in Section 376DA and that on woman under 12 years of age as prescribed under Section 376DB of IPC? Why only life imprisonment under Section 376DA and not death? Why option of life and death in Section 376DB of IPC? Why not mandatory death penalty?

Why should minors who rape and gang rape not be punished with death? Why should they at least not be punished with mandatory life term? Why should they be allowed to escape easily after spending some time in reformatory home as we saw in Nirbhaya gang rape cum murder case where the maximum brutality was committed by the minor?

What message are we sending to the world? That in India you can get away by doing anything just because you are a minor! Why should our law makers not listen to the invaluable advice of Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu in this regard who said that there should be no benefit given to minors when they commit such heinous crimes and underscored that political will is needed to implement it?

Why does India figure even far below Pakistan and Bangladesh in happiness index ranking at an abysmally low 140? It is because in India just two rapists are hanged from 1982 to 2003 and from 2004 to 2019 just one rapist is hanged on circumstantial evidence alone! Is this what is fair and can this be justified in the guise of due process of law?

Why should our outdated colonial laws like IPC, Evidence Act and CrPC not be changed drastically to meet the present circumstances? Why should human rights of women not be accorded the topmost priority? Why when incidents of rape, gang rape by 4 men or 14 men or even more followed by stabbing and followed by setting her ablaze not be followed by gang hanging?

How many incidents of gang rape are followed by gang hanging? Why our rape laws ensure that gang rapists are never hanged? Should we not be ashamed of this?

Why judiciary never ensures that gang rapists are gang hanged? Why we are happy just after seeing that one poor Dhananjoy Chatterjee is hanged on circumstantial evidence alone? If gang rapists who first gang rape and then set the women ablaze after stabbing her also not deserve death penalty then this death penalty must be kicked out of India right now!

Today that is December 10 is Human Rights Day! We must always accept that even woman is human and not just men alone! Therefore, our law makers must ensure that human rights of women are accorded the top priority and those who dare to violate them are dealt with swiftly and sternly in accordance with law which must be now amended urgently to ensure that no criminal is able to mock at women and yet escape lightly just by using his money and muscle power!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top