Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Legal Methods
Anmol Giri
2015010
2nd semester
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Introduction.....3
Provisions related to domestic violence ...4
Cases of domesticviolenceagainst women......6
Cases of domestic violence against men .................................................................................7
Comment on the cases 9
Recent amendment in sec 498a of IPC ..............................................................10
Reasons for the amendment..12
Present condition of men...13
INTRODUCTION
Leading the study of violence against men is the first research to look at the entire series of violence
against men: a silent law. Women as victim and men as perpetrators have been eyeballs for a long time but
now overview of men as victim are most diverse type of case of violence has been publishing. The aim of
this research is to open up a way and acquire some essential figures which indicate how men have been
being subjected to domestic violence by analyzing men living in India. This study includes forms of violence
physical, emotional, psychological and sexualized violence and categorized them separately according to
whether they were experienced in adolescence, adult and married life. This is noted in cases where it was
manifest either from the material or the cases. Country like Indian where image of men is fairly not good
about the violence, where it is in office, public or in home (domestic violence). Where society is patriarchal
and violence by men is very usual, men is considered as outrageous, out of bounds, one who like to do
violence specially in home, thats the reason the image of men in relation with domestic violence is very
bad. So taking into the consideration government, NGOs, and other women welfare organization provides
many facilities to support women and punish men. In this regard government had enacted many law and
provisions. These provisions includes section 113A Indian evidence act, sections 498A and 304B Indian
penal code, dowry provision act 1961 , domestic violence act 2005. The ultimate aim of Government to
enacted these provisions is to punish men perpetrators and protected women victims but the question is that
as men is really a perpetrators or they are victims. Recently in many cases Supreme Court found misuse of
anti-domestic violence provisions by women and men are being threaten, if your wife/daughter in law
whos demands are not met can written false compliant of dowry harassment to nearby police station.
Immediately one along with family is arrested without sufficient investigation and put behind the bars on a
non-bail able terms even if the compliant is false and once image in society is destroyed. Once will suffer
emotionally, psychologically and many other problems. Even one will not tell anyone because of male ego.
What about the suffering of men, Is this violence is not against men, it is. And the laws which were enacted
to protected women and punish men perpetrators stay remain silent there, as no law in India which deals
with the provision of violence against men. And the laws which were made to punish men perpetrators are
using against them, and made them suffer. This is repeatedly accepted by high courts ad supreme court in
India that anti-women violence laws are mere blackmail attempts by wife to harass men. This paper
examines the efficiency of law to protect men from violence.
(a) Anywilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause
grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to
her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or
any person related to her to meet such demand.
3. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 19613
In this Act, dowry means any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or
indirectly.
(a) By one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage, or (b) By the parent of either party to a
marriage or by any other person,, to either party to the marriage or to any other person,
at or before [or any time after the marriage] 2[in connection with the marriage of the said parties, but does
not include] dower or maher in the case of persons to whom the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) applies.
Explanation II.the expression valuable security has the same meaning as in section 30 of the Indian
Penal Code (45 of 1860).
3. In the case of Smt. MayadeviVs. Jagdish Prasad7honourable Justice Dr. ArijitPasayat, In says the
foundation of a sound marriage is tolerance, adjustment and respecting one another. Tolerance to
each others fault to a certain bearable extent has to be inherent in every marriage. Petty quibbles,
trifling differences should not be exaggerated and magnified to destroy what is said to have been
made in heaven.
It means, if the tolerance extends beyond limit, then a party has to approach before the court
1. SMT.SHASHI BALA VS.SHRI RAJIV AROR8: The Petitioner of the case, the wife, was
complaining from the beginning that the husband, the respondent was not a man of her taste. She did
not response to participate in traditional ceremony of dud-mundri. She also did not take interest in
the dinner after wedding. Even she did not allow her husband to have sexual intercourse at the first
wedding night. She also filed false cases against her husband. All these were treated as MENTAL
CRUELTY by the learned Judge of Delhi High Court., honourable Justice Shri Kailash Gambhir has
held that SEXUAL INTERCOURSE IS A MEANS AND AN INTEGRAL ONE OF ACHIEVING
ONENESS IN MARRIAGE.
2. VISHWANATH S\O. SITARAM AGRAWAL VS.SAU. SARLA AGRAWAL9 The wife had
publicised in the newspapers that her husband was a womaniser and drunkard. She had also made
false cases against her husband. All were treated as Mental Cruelty. The Divorce was granted in the
appeal.
3. PARVEEN MEHTA Vs. INDERJIT MEHTA10
Supreme courtIn the case in hand the foundation of the case of 'cruelty' as a matrimonial offence is
based on the allegations made by the husband that right from the day one after marriage the wife was
not prepared to cooperate with him in having sexual intercourse on account of which the marriage
could not be consummated. When the husband offered to have the wife treated medically she
refused. As the condition of her health deteriorated she became irritating and unreasonable in her
behaviour towards the husband. She misbehaved with his friends and relations. She even abused him,
scolded him and caught hold of his shirt collar in presence of elderly persons like Shri S.K.Jain. This
7 Smt. Mayadevi Vs. Jagdish Prasad A.I.R. 2007 SUPREME COURT 1426
8 SMT.SHASHI BALA VS.SHRI RAJIV ARORA: Delhi High Court: 21\3\2012:
9 VISHWANATH S\O. SITARAM AGRAWAL VS.SAU. SARLA AGRAWAL : Supreme Court of India :
4\7\2012 :
10PARVEEN MEHTA Vs. INDERJIT MEHTA Appeal (civil) 3930 of 2002
8 Domestic violence against men: A silent law
Court in the case of Dr.N.G.Dastane Vs. Mrs.S.Dastane (supra), observed : "Sex plays an important
role in marital life and cannot be separated from other factors which lend to matrimony a sense of
fruition and fulfillment".
The dowry offence is presently non-compoundable because of which a husband, his parents and relatives are
booked on a complaint by a woman of cruelty and demand for dowry. The draft Cabinet note has proposed
to make the offence a compoundable offence, which means that the complainant (one who has filed the case,
i.e. the victim), can enter into a compromise, and agree to have the charges dropped against the accused. The
note, however, cautions that such a compromise, has be "bonafide," and shall be made before the same court
before which the trial is proceeding. "Once an offence has been compounded, it shall have the same effect,
as if; the accused has been acquitted of the charges,"
The government has argued that it was only following recommendations of the Malimath Committee13. of
them had highlighted the misuse of this law across the country. Even if the complaint is false, the accused
are presumed guilty until they prove their innocence in the court. If proved guilty, maximum punishment is
three years of jail.
Delhi High Court maintains that if the offence is made compoundable, the accused can settle the case with
the complainant at the trial court itself after arriving at a mutually acceptable agreement. He notes that many
are framed by wives only to extract money and subjected to undue harassment in the trial courts until they
move the High Court to get it compounded." He during his tenure at Delhi High Court had ruled that no
arrest shall be made without the permission of the DCP, who is a senior IPS officer
And one of the major reform has also happened that arrest should be done accordingly, as police cant arrest
husband and relative without permission of state district magistrat14e (SDM) before amendment which can
be doen without any permission just on the FIR of wife without any Question