Are criminal-minded women on the rise! - Article by Smt.R.Sreelekha, IPS

***An open email to Smt.R.Sreelekha, IPS(ADGP, Vigilance and anti-corruption bureau, Kerala)***

Reference: Your article "Karuthamma"maar erunno?(roughly translating into "Are Criminal-minded women on the rise!") . This article is an eye-openingly candid article by R.Sreelekha(ADGP of Police, Kerala). Just wondering how you got the guts to write the truth and what was your motive in writing this, and how 'Malayala Manorama' mustered the courage to run this in the center page!(this article was published in MM, Thrissur edition, 10th page, 19th June, 2013). 

Original News clip and it's brief translation is at ->   : https://www.facebook.com/MensRightsKerala/posts/570321256352616

Dear Madam,

We at PaSS(Purushavakasa Samrakshana Samiti, NGO, Thrissur) would like to express our heart felt appreciation for touching upon an almost Taboo but necessary topic of "Criminality in Women".

We do not consider this topic very pertinent to our time just because we love bad-mouthing women in general!, but because we realise that this topic needs to be discussed and analysed by our public and authorities in the Law enforcement, Judiciary and people representatives, with a view to properly frame our laws which at present seems to consider that only Men are capable of committing crimes. 

In short our laws have to be attuned to the times we live in, and not attuned to the times when these were originally written by and large(most of our legal frame work owes its birth in the 19th century! and very minimal amendments or rationalisation has happened, after this initial frame-work was laid down, to be of any real relief to the citizens of India!)

Our present day laws assume that either 1) A man only is capable of doing some crimes, and not Women or 2) Men do not need the protection of law when it comes to some crimes!. 

These are highly gender-biased, heavily-misused and draconic laws, supposedly instituted for the protection of women(when in actual they DO NOT protect women from the crimes they are supposed to protect women from, due to a lethargic law enforcement system and an even apathetic and ineffective judicial system which DO NOT dispense speedy justice and hence people have lost their faith in these very systems meant to protect them from Crime). These laws are mostly used by unscrupulous women/their advisors with oblique motives, to gain undue advantage, to extort, to submit their adversaries by bringing in pressure of false criminal cases against them..  .

So on both counts these women-protection laws are a failure, and we have observed these inadequacies in the legal systems directly ourselves by way of tracking actual cases which flow along this system and never beget any justice any soon!, whether it be victims of crime, or victims of misue of law!... both do not get any justice from the present systems of justice delivery(or the lack of it!).

Going by the spirit of some gender biased law like Adultery(IPC Section 497, where the accused can only be a Man, and never can be a Woman!, why not?), PWDVA(Protection of Women against Domestic Violence act, where the petitioner SHOULD be a Woman and the Respondent SHOULD be a Man!), etc.,. in these laws its assumed that only Men are capable of committing these crimes, and women even if they are involved are to be considered as acting in duress or at the most abettors(only if the partner in crime in NOT and wife, but a Mother in law or a sister in law, in case of DV act cases filed by Wives!).

The other side to this lacunae in law is that law doesn't extend protection Men when it comes to certain crimes like DV act, Rape, Sexual harassment at work place/at public places/at domestic situations, etc (males get raped too, may be the argument is that its in a lesser number, but that is not enough a reason to deny men of protection by the laws of our country).

So your article is actually a good start point for the authorities to take notice of the pressing need of laws which also 1) Protects Males and 2) Protect males from being falsely accused with the misuse of women-protection laws. 

In our opition, for this to be ensured we just have to 1) make all our laws Gender-Neutral and 2) build-in a very stringent misuse clause in these very laws(which ensures that the courts take up, Suo Mottu, criminal proceedings against the complainants once the allegations are found false/vexatious.

Given the current state of polity(where majority of the politicians are either corrupt or do not care about the welfare of people) we can at least facilitate "Speedy Justice", but again this is more of a wishful thinking since corrupt politicians would not like justice to be any faster than what's the current state of affairs(scope for delay tactics, scope for subverting justice, scope for putting spokes in the wheel of "spirit of law", etc etc).

What we would like to do in this state of despair(we don't know what would resolve these age old issues of our country, but would like to attempt anything which could help to improve the situation) is to spread awareness of the above issues among the public and then evolve a solution which can then be followed-up tightly and implemented under the watchful eyes of the "actual public" (since we have long lost faith in the so called "people representatives")

We would like to associate with people like you who show the moral character to call a spade a spade and who consciously keeps the fire in them alive which can eventually change the way we all live!.

PS: You had hinted your article whether the rise in criminality is due to childhoods in dysfunctional and traumatising family situations, we confirm that this is the reason why each generation is falling into lower and lower standards of existence. We need to work on this need of Saving Indian Family system, you can read our further inputs in this regard here: http://at498a.blogspot.in/2013/05/a-imperialisticallybeautiful-mind.html 

IBM illegally fires man for his sexual harassment complaint against woman boss: Bangalore mirror

This man, Anish Vohra, was cash-strapped because of IBM's illegal job termination just because he made a sexual harassment complaint against his woman boss. They did not technically fire him, but he was forced to resign after this woman boss created adverse situations for him at work, all this without recording any misbehaviour or failings on his part, with no notice period complied with, no salary/compensation for not complying with notice period of 90 days, etc.,. 


The legal notice sent by Anish to IBM reads six typed A4 sized pages and the sexual harassment part is a section of that. The main allegations are about the woman boss abusing her authority and harassing him mentally, and professionally, systematically over a period of 5 months until he was FORCED TO TENDER HIS RESIGNATION. They did not fire him, rather she created a set of circumstances that left him with no alternative but to quit. Added to this was her unprofessional behavior and choice of language, which by IBM's own standards, was not acceptable at any level.


There was no record of any misbehavior or failings in Anish's work, but the woman boss, fifteen days after confirming Anish's job on Feb 01, 201,1 called him to a meeting with HR and insisted that he goes on a Personal Improvement Plan [PIP] in order to continue in IBM. A PIP is conducted for those resources(employees) who are below the mark in every way possible - this action was in direct contradiction with her rating 2 given to Anish(solid contributor, consistently meets job responsibilities, etc. - IBM description!) in December 2010 (with a personal statement from her that Anish had, in the short time span of 4 months, managed to win the appreciation of senior management) and also confirming Anish's job 15 days in advance of his confirmation date. These events show the lady boss' bias, obvious victimization and abuse of power. 15 days after this meeting with HR, Anish had to resign.

He is now unable to find enough money to treat his ailing son. 


See the FB page "Pray For Abhijaat"created for raising money for his son's treatment for Cerebral Palsy, to keep him alive  and also the Website for the same . 


See the various reports in newspapers quoted below(links to the original newspaper reports also appear below) 



************** Report 1***************

Ex-IBM employee accuses woman boss of sexual harassment(Courtesy Bangalore mirror)

Former delivery manager at IT firm demands Rs 88 L compensation; the company terms his charges ‘unfounded’ and ‘without merit’

Sameer Ranjan Bakshi

     

Posted On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 at 10:40:42 AM

Anish Vohra Debunking the common stereotype of a male executive hitting on a female colleague, a male mid-level manager has quit his job at IBM, alleging sexual harassment at the workplace. In a first-of-its-kind case, the man has filed a complaint with the company and has also slapped a legal notice on his former “offensive” woman boss and two others, including the MD of the IT behemoth’s India branch. In the legal notice, Anish Vohra, who worked as a delivery manager for the company, accused his former woman boss of using abusive language while speaking to him in the office. Vohra alleges that he was forced to resign from the company and has claimed a compensation of Rs 87,91,650, including mental torture of Rs 10,000. Policy at IBM forbids employees from speaking to the media, unless expressly authorised to do so. Hence, the name of the woman boss is being withheld because her version of the events could not be obtained. Vohra joined as a delivery manager (proposal and ICAP) on August 16 last year and was on six months probation at IBM’s Global Enablement Center. He began working directly under the supervision of the woman he now accuses of harassing him. He claims he was confirmed 15 days ahead of the stipulated six months by which time professional relationship with his boss had already begun to deteriorate. A paragraph in the legal notice reads: “Our client states that after giving a rating of 2, indicating excellent performance, suddenly she became hostile and beginning in December 2010, the professional relations deteriorated. She started losing patience and became highly critical without any reason and was abusive at times. On account of this behaviour our client (Vohra) sought a meeting which was held on 10.01.2011 and 14.01.2011, wherein she stated, ‘You are different from other managers in IBM. I need to treat you differently from them. I have been unnecessarily harsh with you I agree. I apologise for this behaviour’. “In the second meeting our client further states that she also uttered the following words, ‘I do not know what it is between you and me I just cannot get along with you’. And also stated, ‘I get the feeling that you are jacking me of and simply f***ing around with me’ and then stated ‘forgive the words/expression used’. “Our client states that the use of unparliamentary language was in the least objectionable and if uttered to a senior management would have resulted in termination of services.” The notice goes on to say, “Our client states that at the time of joining service of IBM our client had signed the Business Conduct Guidelines (BCG) which specifically prohibited use of slang language as well as use of profanity or language which would hurt the sentiments of another. Our client states that the language used also amounted to victimisation of our client, for reasons best known to her and which was never disclosed to our client.” Vohra also claims that the language used by his former boss amounts to sexual harassment as, “IBM being an Ideal Employer, has framed strict rules for prevention of harassment at the work place, called Recognition & Preventing Workplace Harassment- India Employees Edition. Work place harassment is a violation of human rights.” Vohra has also alleged, “The employment contract stipulated that the company or the employee may terminate the services at any time by giving 90 days notice or salary in lieu thereof. However, without informing me or recording any misbehaviour, they forced me to resign abruptly without paying me any compensation or salary for the notice period.” The notice was also served on Shankar Annaswamy, managing director, IBM India Private Limited, and Lynette Clunies Ross, director, Sales Transaction Hub, GMU, IBM Limited. IBM at first refused to answer phone calls or respond to emails from BM seeking their comments. An IBM spokesperson eventually said, “We have fully investigated this matter. The claims made are unfounded and without merit.”

**************** Report 2***************

Dad on Facebook to save son’s life (Courtesy Bangalore Mirror)

Anish Vohra has set up a community in the social network to raise funds for treatment of 2-yr-old Abhijaat, who suffers from cerebral palsy

Sameer Ranjan Bakshi

     

Posted On Wednesday, July 13, 2011 at 12:02:02 AM

Facebook has helped Anish and Deepti raise Rs 1.5 lakh of the Rs 56.35 lakh they need for their son’s treatment It’s every parent’s worst nightmare, but Anish Vohra keeps his chin up. His two-year-old son, Abhijaat, is suffering from cerebral palsy, and the city-based former IBM delivery manager needs funds — $125,000 (Rs 56.35 lakh) to be exact — if his son is to live a healthy life. Vohra, who has been unemployed for the past three months, is strapped for cash, having already spent all his savings on Abhijaat’s treatment. At the end of his tether, he has set up a community on Facebook and has launched a portal in the hope of raising money from donors to fund stem cell treatment — Vohra’s last hope — for his son. Vohra believes that his Facebook forum, ‘Pray for Abhijaat’, and portal ‘For Abhijaat’ have helped him appeal to a wider audience. He launched his online campaign last year and has raised $3,348 (Rs 1.5 lakh) so far. He keeps donors updated on Abhijaat’s progress with frequent posts on the sites. “He came into our lives on July 3, 2008, suddenly, unexpectedly and a good four weeks ahead of schedule due to low amniotic fluid,” Vohra posted. “He did not cry right after birth, he had a breathing difficulty due to very bad stridor (obstruction in the air passage). At first, doctors did not give him a chance, but with the help of C-PAP and oxygen, he survived. He was a good healthy baby, no major issues.” But Abhijaat was afflicted by a number of complications. He continued to suffer from respiratory problems, his right knee was dislocated at birth and he lacked the ability to grasp things, to sit or to smile, walk or talk. Abhijaat has been in and out of hospitals and has already had three surgeries, the last in Chicago which cost $197,614 (about Rs 89 lakh). “We got his knee fixed with physiotherapy and splinting,” Vohra posted. “No one told us there was something wrong with him, just that ‘milestones were delayed’. We used to think ‘So what. He would come around’.” Vohra and his wife Deeti’s world came crashing down when they learnt from a paediatric neurologist that their son had cerebral palsy. “His motor abilities and speech have been affected. His hands and legs are spastic. “Maybe Abhi does not pronounce consonants yet to say Mama, but he makes enough sounds for us to hear Mama in there somewhere. He holds objects placed in his hands for a little while, listens to the sound of our voices and responds to rudimentary instructions. “He shows us there is the possibility of a good healthy life within his reach. He is the sweetest little boy you can imagine.” Dr Gyanam, one of the paediatric specialists treating Abhijaat at Manipal Hospital, said, “His brain cells were damaged at the time of delivery because of a lack of oxygen to the brain. “It will take a while for Abhijaat to be discharged as he now has pneumonia triggered by an infection in his lungs.” What ails AbhijaatCerebral palsy is a non-progressive, non-contagious motor condition that causes physical disability in human development in various parts of the body. Abhijaat needs stem cell treatment available in only a few countries such as China and Germany. There is no guarantee that the treatment would work. The Vohras are in touch with the Wu Stem Cell Medical Centre in Beijing. They would need boarding and lodging for the duration of the treatment - typically three months. It would cost about $125,000. For details visit: http://forabhijaat.org/index.html, or https://www.facebook.com/prayforabhijaat?sk=info

Black day for India & Indian families - Anniversary of the anti-family D.V Act

On October 26th(2006), the highly biased and anti-family, anti- human rights, constitutionally ultra vires, Domestic Violence law(PWDVA) came into force in India.

This day was a small step for the anti-india, "anti-family bandwagon", the feminazies, their cronies and their puppet-masters, but a giant leap for Mankind, as we know it, into the abyss of injustice and against all the tenets of natural justice .

If we are even a bit concerned of our children, we need to understand this abysmally retrograde, suicidal, leap of mankind, and act upon our inferences, yes we need to do it like there's no tomorrow, since there won't be a tomorrow this way!

Check out: http://antimisandry.com/a/eroding-faulty-duluth-model-1322.html and
http://www.manwomanmyth.com/domestic-violence/when-is-domestic-violence-not-domestic-violence/


Black day was observed in Bangalore and other parts of India to spread awareness among the unsuspecting Indian citizens. Old aged parents getting kicked out and dispossessed of their own hard-earned houses, un-involved relatives reined in and harassed for years together, whether they be male or female.


These traits of this law are enough for any common man to understand that this law is not pro-Women or intended for women-protection at all, this law(PWDVA) is just a "weapon of mass destruction" in the hands of unscrupulous people, and vested powers let this injustice continue, since India can only be weakened by weakening and obliterating its family system!

Neo-Imperialistic powers: Neo-ways to Divide & Rule

Issues like this(bias of law against (or for) a particular gender) are not about/based on natural animosity between male and female genders, nor do they help the supposedly protected gender(women in all the cases!).

Its an attempt by neo-imperialists to eye-wash the public using their natural soft-corners for a gender, the real intention is to use such mind games to get undeserving/un-natural power, to sustain the empire built in such way and to harness the power for more money, and hence more power and more resources to grow this empire built on self-centered and parasitic tactics, deceptions, mass mis-propaganda, hate-mongering and ruthless cannibalism.

Gender biased laws(and other such gender biased provisions) are made by vested interests to get the benefits they want(not to the intended women), by instigating an artificial/un-natural/cultivated animosity between the genders. Whereas if one tries to see all this from a higher perspective, it becomes very clear that these vested interests are employing a divide and rule policy and capture power through economic terrorism, using the two genders.

"Ardhanaareeshwara" is the truth and constitution(the body-mind complex) in everyone one us. This means every man is a mix of male and female characteristics. And that male and female genders are built to compliment each other, though built, seemingly, with a lot of conflicts and in-congruity compared to one another's constitution. 


The relevance of the "Ardhanareeshwara" concept in the present day society and how it played a critical role in making Indian families, and hence our culture itself, so robust and progressive, even so many centuries before, is outlined in this blog post by Mrs.Uma Challa.

If a living being is ever tried to be built with all male and female characteristics put together, such group of living beings will perish due to monotony, if not anything else!. 


No wonder evolution did not make all of us exact replicas of each other, in terms of constitution(hormones, anatomy, brain constitution, responses to stimuli, etc.)

All kind of Gender Biased provisions are with evil intents/agenda on the part of vested interests(a powerful super minority) who wants to plunder the vast majority of others, using, age-old but, highly effective principles like deception and divide & rule.

Say no to all gender biased provisions, save life and society as we know it. Say .... We demand Gender-neutral Laws

Cowardice asks...."Is it safe?", Expedience asks "Is it politic?", Vanity asks...."Is it popular?"... There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, politic, nor popular, but one must take it because it is right

Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dare to admit that you like this idea?, ready to express your true feelings?....  Join this facebook group and declare your opinion ... that "We demand Gender-neutral Laws"




PS: 
Some gender-specific traits as examples, 1) male: brute force, testosterone induced fights against great odds- courage in face of big odds(even if the brain says that the challenge is much above his ability to conquer. Eg. Fighting with a Lion with only a stick, to protect his family), ability to control others by projected fear - intimidation (alpha male lions, once they vanquish the old leader keep the rest of the pack under control just by intimidation tactics), 2) female: Patience, Love, maintaining the household, etc.

Excerpts from the article "Gender Characteristics": 

 Characteristics of the masculine gender are: abstract thinking, activeness, ambition, conditional love, constancy, contemplation, courage, creativity, daring, dependability, discipline, force, independence, individuality, knowledge, leadership, originality, pioneering spirit, positivity, progressiveness, spirituality, stability, and will-power.

Characteristics of the feminine gender are: accommodation, adaptability, caring, companionship, consideration, cooperation, diplomacy, friendliness, gentility, giving, harmony, industriousness, informative, materialism, nurturing, receptivity, responsiveness, rhythm, visual thinking, and unconditional love.

I may be the fool here, but let me risk the possibility of being termed just that

Why this Dual Standards? -Why dont we write the laws entirely pandering to women's desires instead. Re:Married woman can live with her lover, says court

Ref:Article in Hindustan Times, dtd.April 19, 2007 -> http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=9e0b7ae6-86f2-4cb8-812e-a71677b4d729&

Married woman can live with her lover, says court
by KS Tomar, Email Author , Jaipur,

Subject: But really..........Can a married woman lawfully live with her lover against the will of her husband?
(do comment on this subject at http://www.saveindianfamily.org/articles/2007/04/i-may-be-fool-here-but-let-me-risk.html )

Hello Everyone,

I may be the fool here, but let me risk the possibility of being termed just that, and yet ask everyone- whether a woman can live with her lover(especially without the consent of her husband!, howmuchever unlikely the possibility of situations to the contrary could be!), while her legal marriage with her husband still exists(will she be legally correct in doing so?. At least isn't a crime of Adultery for her lover?): http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/IndianPenalCode/S497.htm , excerpt of this is quoted at the bottom of this mail for ready reference).


Its a simple question, which I consciously made so short so that we can start the discussion based on the popular verdict on this.

The secondary question related to whether a married woman can live with her lover, while her legal husband is alive and non-consenting to this scenario, is that, whether a Judge of an Indian court right, in pronouncing that there is nothing wrong (did the learned judge mean that nothing is wrong 'morally'!, is his role to be a love-guru or a culture-vulture or even a purveyor of morality, or , as expected of him, the upholder of justice or at least, in the bargain, the upholder of WRITTEN LAW prevailing in Present India!).

Some observations on the news(this is uploaded at http://www.protectindianfamily.org/?module=filesdb&id=7&fid=3&get=1 for reference)

The judge may be logically or even morally correct in taking this stance in the above scenario, since the girl, in this case, seem to be not all interested(even before marriage she had this 'thing' going!) in her 'legally-married-to-husband". Moreover her lover seems to be ready to face a possible 'Adultery' case! against him, which is what the IPC 497-Adultery
reads out, but only that the judge is not at all ready to take action against him on grounds of adultery, which is the justifiable behaviour expected out of an Honourable Judge(I am assuming that the detailed judgement really doesn't talk about an action under section 497 ie. Adultery law, already been pressed on the lover)

Why this double standards by the Judiciary!- when a girl does obviously wrongful acts according to the WRITTEN LAW of a country, she gets away with favourable interpretations, hearings and readings of the law. This is ensure even if it requires our Judges to do this by bending over backwards or even winding themselves into unjustifiable coils of Judicial wisdom and interpretations, and "woolly woolly words" for judgements, with a willing 180 degree spin-doctoring by the Judiciary , only when the party concerned is a woman(along with her paramour, intact, at her heels). I am not at all justifying the girl's husband, I am just focusing on the courts lenience towards her, which is just the summary of many a case in India, a blatant Gender-Skew!.

Meanwhile when men live by the law, they are treated Guilty until proven innocent(by his own effort, ie. burden of proof solely on himself), yes I am referring to the misuse of gender-biased-skewed laws like IPC 498a and Domestic Violence Act , etc.. If in the legal interpretation of our judges men always have a propensity to do 'bad', and thats why they need to give some 'headstart' to women by ruling in favour of them!, why don't they change the 'WRITTEN LAW ' , so that at least men do not have the ignominy of living with a
non-enforceable Indian Penal Code with respect to men, by and large!.

So the Questions once again are:

1. Whether a married woman can live with her lover, while her legal husband is alive and non-consenting to this scenario(this has reference to the validity of the Adultery law ie IPC 497, as it stands now!)- will she be legally correct in doing so

2. With respect to the above scenario, whether a Judge of an Indian court right in pronouncing that there is nothing wrong on the part of the lady or her lover.- Is the Judge legally correct in doing so

Reference: Indian Penal Code, Section 497. Adultery

Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows
or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of
rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall be punishable as an abettor.(->Interpretation, the Girl is not an
offender of any law in this case, not even a co-accused!)

----------------------------------------------------
On 4/19/07, ramdama dam wrote:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=9e0b7ae6-86f2-4cb8-812e-a71677b4d729&Can a married woman lawfully live with her lover against the will of her husband? The Rajasthan High Court says yes. In a judgment on Wednesday, the court allowed a married woman, Manju, to live with her lover, Suresh. "It is improper to pass an order to hand over any unwilling married woman to her husband with whom she does not want to stay," said justices GS Mishra and KC Sharma. The court also said that nobody should consider an adult woman as a consumer product. While dismissing a habeas corpus petition filed by Manju's husband, the court came down hard on the misuse of habeas corpus petitions by people who want to thrust their will upon adult women without their consent. The court said the husband was free to approach the family court for divorce. Commenting on the judgment, senior Supreme Court advocate and noted women's rights activist Indira Jaising said, "Though it sounds strange, I am in complete agreement with the high court." "At the end of the day an adult woman has a right to decide whom she wants to live with. She can't be forced to go with her husband against her will," Jaising said. In this case, Jaising said, it is clear that the woman was prepared for divorce. She also felt that Manju's husband had abused the habeas corpus petition because such petitions were generally filed when somebody is actually missing. Asked whether it amounted to adultery, Jaising clarified that the woman could not be prosecuted for this offence under the law. As for the other man, she said, "it seems he is ready to face that". National Commission for Women Chairperson Girija Vyas said that although it seemed like an important judgment, she could not comment on it since she had not seen it yet. Manoj Chaudhry, the counsel for Manju and Suresh, had earlier rejected as baseless the allegations that Manju had been kept in illegal confinement by Suresh. He said that the duo had been living together by their free will and that the relationship had begun even before Manju had got married. With inputs from Satya Prakash and Sutirtho Patranobis.

. All India Helpline Number: 91-92434 73794 (24 Hours)Alternate Nos : 91-9810611534 or 080-65334135 Volunteer Helpline Numbers (limited contact hours)--------------------------------------------------------------- Delhi: Ashish : 9911119113, Swarup : 9810611534 Rajiv :9891369616 Bangalore: 80-65334135 Kolkata : 033-25347398/25217318 Mumbai: 9224335577 / 9869323538 Ahmadabad:9825365816