WOMEN – 2011 - Indian Social Institute

informed. (Pioneer, 21/01/2011)
Another BSP MLA lands in controversy
Another Bahujan Samaj Party MLA in Uttar Pradesh is facing the heat — for allegedly shielding a school
principal who is accused of raping a woman in the presence of her husband in Etawah district. Like in the
Banda case, here too the alleged rape victim is languishing in the Etawah jail along with four others on
the charge of provoking her husband to commit suicide. The alleged rape victim submitted a petition in
the court on January 18. However, before the case, listed in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate in Etawah, could come up for hearing on January 29, Bhartana MLA Shiv Prasad Yadav and
the principal were given a clean chit by the State government on Sunday. According to the police, the
principal was not in town on December 16 last, the day the alleged rape was committed. The MLA has
also denied the charge. The deceased and the principal were said to be close friends. The former was a
computer teacher in the school owned by the BSP MLA. According to Special DG (Law and Order) Brij
Lal, the woman said the principal used to frequent her in-law's house and make passes at her. On
December 16, she said, her husband and the principal consumed liquor and the latter subsequently raped
her with the consent of her husband. Why and how the husband consumed “sulfas” leading to his death
on December 21 was not explained by the officer. The woman has accused the BSP MLA of shielding the
principal and pressuring the police to lodge a case against her and her relatives on December 21. Mr. Lal
told reporters that going by the principal's phone call details and information gathered from the mobile
phone tower, his location on December 16, 17 and 18 was found to be about 17 km away from the place
the alleged rape took place. On January 18, a petition was filed in the court by the woman's father, which
said his daughter had complained that the principal held her hand. “The versions of the father and
daughter are contradictory,” Mr. Lal said. A probe by ASP, Etawah, has been ordered into the case.
(Hindu, 24/01/2011)
Can women be tried under 2005 Act for domestic violence?
There is a problem women have with the law enacted to protect women from domestic violence. The
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 was meant to make women safe at home by
empowering them to prosecute their husband and other male members of the family for any act of
violence. But with increasing complaints being filed against female relatives in the family, the Supreme
Court has decided to examine whether the law could be applied against women as well. A Bench of
Justices HS Bedi and CK Prasad, while throwing open this question to debate, issued notice on a petition
filed by a Government school teacher in Haryana. The petitioner Renu was roped in as an accused by her
sister-in-law Sarika under the Domestic Violence Act. Renu got married in year 2000 while Sarika came
into the matrimonial home six years later. The case against Renu was filed in 2009. In her petition filed
through advocate Alok Sangwan, Renu has raised the question how the law to protect women could be
used against them. Unlike the Dowry Prohibition Act or the Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 498A
(cruelty by husband or relatives of husband) and 304B (dowry death) which are gender-neutral, this is not
the case with the 2005 Act. In the Act itself, the distinction is clear, she said. According to Section 2(q) of
the 2005 Act, respondent against whom an action can be brought under the Act means “any adult male
person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person.” An aggrieved person in
this case refers to “any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent.” The
petition has raised another interesting point of defence. Since the law seeks to punish any act of domestic
violence alone, Renu maintained that she permanently stays away from her brother and sister-in-law
(Sarika), separated by a distance of about 100 kilometres. Sensing misuse of the law, the apex court
stayed criminal proceedings against Renu for the time being. The court further noticed that on the same
question posed before it, several High Courts gave contradictory judgments. A recent Delhi High Court
decision held prosecution against female relatives under the Act to be correct. It relied on the proviso to
Section 2(q) of the Act, which said: “An aggrieved wife or female living in a relationship in the nature of
marriage may also file a complaint against a relative of the husband or the male partner.” Noting that a
relative of husband would not be limited by gender distinction, the Delhi HC concluded such an
interpretation alone served the purpose under the Act. At the same time, single bench of the Madras High
Court and Madhya Pradesh High Court have given a conflicting view. They have held that the Domestic
Violence Act could not be applied against women. Amid the prevailing confusion, the Supreme Court will
have to hold the law to be fair to the fair sex on both sides of the divide. (Pioneer, 24/01/2011)