Rohtak sisters incidence: Media verdict out, before investigation starts!

Final Side (see the investigative youtube video below, also see the mail trail posted below) of ‪#‎FakeBraveHearts‬ false molestation case.

#FakeBraveHearts Rohtak Exposed..... Serial extortionists, why is the media trial not restarting now?.

This is the Final Side of the Rohtak Bravehearts story that SIF has been covering since last one week. After meeting the eyewitnesses on the case, SIF met people who have been victim of the same girls in the past. If this is a mere coincidence or it's a case of serial extorters in the name of women centric laws - well the police will find out.

As for now, it seems when the case has taken a complete turn, Media is no longer interested to hear the pain of people on the other side OR show how many people have been abused and cheated by the same girls and their family. Rohtak Bravehearts case has taken a turn because several witnesses have come in support of the boys, Imagine if the boys were alone! If you wish to raise voice against misuse of law TWEET using‪#‎fakecases‬.

If you know anyone who is a victim of a false case by a woman, call 08882498498 or mail martyrsofmarriage@gmail.com or logon to saveindianfamily.in

********* My original feedback mail, when Hindu reported this incident inappropriately***********
Feedback: Damned if you do, damned if you don’t

Dear Ms.Mythili(mythili.s@thehindu.co.in),

Read your article "Damned if you do, damned if you don’t"(Dated 8/12/2014, The Hindu: http://m.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-dont/article6670326.ece/?secid=12624).

In the Rohtak sister's video only one thing is evident prima facie, that the girls are thrashing the boys, so as per law they are committing a crime(without going into the reason why they are doing it), so are you condoning it by saying that it's the way for girls to 'speak up against harassment'. If people start to speak up for themselves like this, what is the law for?. 

The girls in this case has surely committed a crime of thrashing the boys on video(not going into the background or claims by either side) and you are actually singing paeans in honour of these criminals!. 

Why don't you have the patience to wait for an investigation by the authorised personnel to take place, why this rashness in reporting by passing judgements!(in this case you have judged that there is partiality towards women who are oppressed!, by interlacing this incidence with others, while the investigation in this case is still underway!).

To put all this in perspective very quickly, lets imagine the genders are reversed in this case. Assume that there is a video of boys thrashing girls with belts, etc and claims that the girls had harassed them and that's why they had to do it!. Now what would you have thought?, and would you have judged!?.

As for the background and emerging inputs in this case, see these links below if you haven't already:

MUST SEE - OTHER SIDE OF ROHTAK BRAVEHEARTS

				MUST SEE - OTHER SIDE OF ROHTAK BRAVEHEARTS
				View on www.youtube.com	Preview by Yahoo

#RohtakSisters who framed Army aspirants with a fake case of harassment/molestation. See the other side of the story with eyewitnesses vouching for the falsely framed boys and people from the girl's village saying that the sisters had extorted money from another boy's family in a similar way earlier.

But if laws are made so that people can be framed without requiring any evidence or witness, someone like these sisters is bound to misuse!.

Deepika Bhardwaj on Twitter

				Deepika Bhardwaj on Twitter Women from college of #RohtakBraveHearts submit complaint, say girls never attended college, roamed in parks, fought pic.twitter.com/zpcdlNVhUL
				View on twitter.com	Preview by Yahoo

Women from college of #RohtakBraveHearts submit complaint, say girls never attended college, roamed in parks, fought

The question is not just how videos are getting made(by the girl's own contacts, as per reports by media, though denied by these girls) whenever these girls are allegedly getting harassed(this question is by Zee news as heard in this particular clip). 

The questions are numerous, including...why are these videos not covering even a bit of the alleged harassment!(especially since the videos are getting made by girl's own contacts), and since these girls claim that they have been harassed umpteen(2000, as the girl says here) times and whenever it happens "they give it back!", if they are so prepared for all this, why is there no scenes of the alleged harassment(at least a few times out of the 2000 times!). 

Most importantly the way media pounces in for a media trial(& judgement) is appalling to say the least!.

Preity Zinta alleges molestation by ex-boyfriend after 4 months!

Preity Zinta alleges molestation by ex-boyfriend after 4 months!.... surprised?, me.... not so surprised since I have been witnessing umpteen number of such "after-thought" cases used as a leverage to eek out money, revenge or whatever the 'lady' is interested in!

I neither personally know about this case(new report and the FIR are quoted below ) nor am I speaking for any of the parties involved, neverthless it's a fact that even the Supreme court had termed this kind of misuse as "legal terrorism". 

Pune police had gone on record stating that 74% of rape cases are found false( 74 per cent of rapes reported to them were intercourse with mutual consent), later supreme court and various high court's too had expressed concern about misusing such laws as a leverage to get something else done!.

********************** Final Analysis********************

If you you are wondering where is the "Molestation" mentioned, don't be surprised , IPC section 354 is now(after the amendment in 2013) Cognisable(police can arrest without warrant) and Non-bailable(you cannot get bail from police station, you have to get it from court). So this section was added for making the case "Strong"(read to get the desired ransom from the Wadia coffers!)

Latest News: She is reaching a settlement(imaginably a good ransom settlement) as expected!: Here is a blog post "6 (not 10) excuses we wouldn’t want to hear from Preity Zinta" asking Ms.Zinta some hard questions!

Original link: http://www.deccanchronicle.com/140614/entertainment-bollywood/article/all-you-want-know-about-molestation-case-preity-zinta%E2%80%99s

All you want to know about the molestation case, Preity Zinta reveals

Deccan Chronicle | June 14, 2014, 16.06 pm IST

Mumbai: Actor Preity Zinta has filed a police complain against former boyfriend Ness Wadia, alleging that she was threatened, abused and molested by him. Preity later broke her silence on the incident on a social networking site. 

Read: Actress Preity Zinta files molestation case against Ness Wadia

On the social networking site she wrote,

From my heart….

I may not be super wealthy and powerful but i have truth by my side and I’ve worked very hard all my life and tried to earn respect for myself as a self made professional. It saddens me that no one at work or around ever stood up for me in the past when i was abused and insulted publicly. This time i was left with no option but to take this stern step as this incident happened in front of way too many people.

Sometimes we are so ashamed and humiliated that we fool ourselves to believe that no one saw what happened . Everyone always looks away as if they don't exist or then we don’t exist. People are embarrassed just enough to look away, but not too embarrassed to intervene.

Read: False and baseless allegations: Ness Wadia on Preity's sexual molestation complaint

Ironically what happened at Wankade is being diluted by every other fabricated story about my character except the truth of what happened. I'm sure the witnesses will speak the truth and i trust and believe that the police will do their job fairly and quickly.

No woman likes to be involved in a controversy like this which makes her open and vulnerable for all to take a dig at. I have worked for over 15 years in the film industry and have never been subject to such humiliating behaviour and for that i really want to thank all the men that worked with me. Through all our highs and lows my head was always held high.

Every human being has a limit to how much they can take ; some of us foolishly call it strength and try to look ahead focusing on the positives of work and life. All these years i have never said anything about him in the media but now i have no choice.

I humbly request the media and my supporters to pls focus on the issue and the incident that happened in Wankade and not turn this and me into a TV soap. This is not easy for me and my intention is not to harm anyone but simply to protect myself and to stand up for myself. I don’t want any sympathy from anyone but i will sincerely appreciate it if people do not try to take away my dignity in the process of my fight for respect at my workplace. I think after all these years i deserve it and I’m not asking for too much.

******************************

First Information Report: FIR

********************** Final Analysis********************

If you you are wondering where is the "Molestation" mentioned, don't be surprised , IPC section 354 is now(after the amendment in 2013) Cognisable(police can arrest without warrant) and Non-bailable(you cannot get bail from police station, you have to get it from court). So this section was added for making the case "Strong"(read to get the desired ransom from the Wadia coffers!)

See the relevent excerpts, from this amendment, below.

6. In section 354 of the Penal Code, for the words "shall be punished with imprisonment
of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both", the
words "shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not
be less than one year but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine" shall

be substituted.

7. After section 354 of the Penal Code, the following sections shall be inserted, namely:—

Sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment.

'354 A.

1. A man committing any of the following acts—

i. physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual overtures; or

ii. a demand or request for sexual favours; or

iii. showing pornography against the will of a woman; or

iv. making sexually coloured remarks, shall be guilty of the offence of sexual harassment.

2. Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (I) or clause (ii) or clause (iii) of sub-section (I) shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.

3. Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (iv) of sub-section (I) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both

Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe.

354B. Any man who assaults or uses criminal force to any woman or abets such act with the intention of disrobing or compelling her to be naked, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Voyeurism.

354C. Any man who watches, or captures the image of a woman engaging in a private act in circumstances where she would usually have the expectation of not being observed either by the perpetrator or by any other person at the behest of the perpetrator or disseminates such image shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine, and be punished on a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than three years, but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation I.— For the purpose of this section, "private act" includes an act of watching carried out in a place which, in the circumstances, would reasonably be expected to provide privacy and where the victim's genitals, posterior or breasts are exposed or covered only in underwear; or the victim is using a lavatory; or the victim is doing a sexual act that is not of a kind ordinarily done in public.

Explanation 2.— Where the victim consents to the capture of the images or any act, but not to their dissemination to third persons and where such image or act is disseminated, such dissemination shall be considered an offence under this section.

Stalking.

354D.

1. Any man who—

i. follows a woman and contacts, or attempts. to contact such woman to foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman; or

ii. monitors the use by a woman of the internet, email or any other form of electronic communication, commits the offence of stalking:

Provided that such conduct shall not amount to stalking if the man who pursued it proves that—

i. it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime and the man accused of stalking bad been entrusted with the responsibility of prevention and detection of crime by the State; or

ii. it was pursued under any law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any law; or

iii. in the particular circumstances such conduct was reasonable and justified.

2. Whoever commits the offence of stalking shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; and be punished on a second or subsequent conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.'

CCTV footage from Wankade stadium on the alleged day, 30th March, 2014, please note that Ness was 6 rows away from PZ, as this report says, while another report gives another angle to this incidence, but until now there is no description of Molestation or outraging the modesty of a woman as prescribe by IPC section 354, as alleged on Mr.Ness Wadia!.

Excerpt from the later new report: Speaking on condition of anonymity, a source close to Wadia said the industrialist had booked 14 odd seats in Garware Pavilion and got angry when he saw his mother Maureen Wadia standing as all seats had been occupied by Zinta and her guests.

Wadia then got engaged in an argument with the actress over lack of courtesy being shown to his elderly mother "which has now been twisted and turned into a molestation case".

Zinta's complaint, however, has no mention of this.

The actress said Wadia abused her on the ground and said things which were "demeaning for my reputation and character" and, as it happened in front of so many people, "it has really disturbed me and caused immense damage to my reputation and character".

"Mr Ness Wadia's aforesaid behaviour on numerous occasions has embarrassed me and made me feel ashamed, especially in public," she said.

The full news report from rediff, quoted below for ready reference:

Preity Zinta molestation: Police examine CCTV footage

Mumbai police on Saturday launched a probe into alleged molestation of Bollywood actress Preity Zinta by her former boyfriend Ness Wadia and would soon record the statements of IPL CEO and others even as the industrialist rejected the charge as "false and baseless".

Sources at Marine Drive police station said the probe team headed by an Inspector has begun examining the CCTV footage of the incident.

The 39-year-old actress had filed a police complaint on Thursday night alleging that she was molested by Wadia, 44, inside Wankhede stadium on May 30 when an IPL match was played between Kings XI Punjab and Chennai Super Kings.

Zinta and Wadia had broken off their five-year-long relationship a couple of years back but continued to share business interest.

"We are verifying the CCTV footage to identify people present to record their statement," an officer involved in the investigation said.

Several players of IPL team Kings XI Punjab, of which Zinta is a co-owner with Wadia, its support staff, and officials of Wankhede Stadium were reported to have been present when the alleged incident took place.

Zinta, in her complaint, has referred to another unsavoury incident during the IPL team auctions in Bangalore where IPL CEO Sunder Raman was present and had intervened. His statement would be recorded in that context, sources said.

"We will be recording the statement of IPL CEO as Zinta has said that after she refused to sit with Wadia, he had screamed at her and the IPL CEO had intervened," the officer said.

Based on Zinta's written complaint, Marine Drive police have registered an FIR against Wadia under IPC sections 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace), 506 (criminal intimidation) and 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman).

Narrating what transpired on May 30, Zinta said Wadia began "shouting and yelling" at team's support staff and, when she tried to calm him down, as her team was playing well, "for no reason he started abusing and screaming at me, grabbed my arm and tried to pull me by hand".

"I am shocked at the complaint and the allegations made against me are totally false and baseless," Wadia said in a statement.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a source close to Wadia said the industrialist had booked 14 odd seats in Garware Pavilion and got angry when he saw his mother Maureen Wadia standing as all seats had been occupied by Zinta and her guests.

Wadia then got engaged in an argument with the actress over lack of courtesy being shown to his elderly mother "which has now been twisted and turned into a molestation case".

Zinta's complaint, however, has no mention of this.

The actress said Wadia abused her on the ground and said things which were "demeaning for my reputation and character" and, as it happened in front of so many people, "it has really disturbed me and caused immense damage to my reputation and character".

"Mr Ness Wadia's aforesaid behaviour on numerous occasions has embarrassed me and made me feel ashamed, especially in public," she said.

Zinta went on to say, "he has gone to the extent of threatening me with dire consequences and intimidated me by boasting of his political clout and connection.

"During the match on 30th May at Wankhede Stadium, in the evening, Mr Wadia intimidated me by saying that he could make me disappear as I was a nobody and only an actress and he is a powerful person," she said, adding the incident had left her "shattered".

The actress also said she had lodged a verbal complaint with BCCI officials.

In a Facebook post, Zinta said she had to take the "stern step" as the incident took place in front of "way too many people" and hoped the police will do their job "fairly and quickly".

Calling it a "fight for respect at my workplace", the actress said she had truth by her side but was saddened that "no one at work or around ever stood up for me in the past when I was abused and insulted publicly."

"This time I was left with no option but to take this stern step as this incident happened in front of way too many people," she said and requested that it should not be diluted by "every other fabricated story about my character" and made into a TV soap.

Questioning the "delay" in taking action in the case, Maharashtra State Women's Rights Commission gave the city police a 24-hour ultimatum to arrest Wadia.

Chitra Wagh, a member of the state's Women's Rights Commission, who visited Marine Drive police station to inquire about the progress of investigation, said, "We have served a 24-hour ultimatum to Mumbai police to arrest Ness Wadia."

National Commission for Women has decided to take suo motu cognisance of the allegations and will conduct a detailed investigation into the case.

"We will take cognisance of Preity Zinta's case and conduct a detailed investigation into the matter on our own," NCW chairperson Mamta Sharma said.

"I have got to know through media reports that Preity used to live together with Ness Wadia till 2009. But it doesn't matter. If Wadia did something wrong as what Zinta is alleging, then we will proceed as per findings of our investigation," Sharma said.

Expressing her disapproval, senior Congress leader Shobha Ahuja said that it was not important with whom violence is committed, instead it is important who is committing it.

"There is need to change the mindset of men. We have to give rights to women similar to men. If this mindset is not changed, such incidents will happen even to celebrities and other women working in high posts," Shobha said.

************** Another report on the CCTV footage **************

Deccan chronicle report mentioning the angle of "Zinta's Jealousy towards Ness Wadia's new girlfriend!". Excerpt: In a shocking twist, Wadia’s friends have now alleged that the bad blood between two former lovers was because of his having found love with another woman and moving on.

Voice your opinion against the proposed, biased "Protection of Women's Privacy & Dignity bill"

Voice your opinion against the proposed, partisan "Protection of Women's Privacy & Dignity bill" 

PASS(Purushavakasa Samrakshana Samiti, NGO, Thrissur. www.mensrights.in) - A group of our members are going to Trivandrum on 30th May, to represent our views and concerns about the proposed "2013, Kerala, Protection of Women's privacy and Decency Act"(for details refer the Bill text), infront of the Subject committee(who has called the public and interested organisations for representing their views, recording their opinions and evidences thereby).

This  Subject committee(No. XIV) is headed by CM of Kerala(refer The constitution of the committee, Press Note & Questionnaire for more details. You can also refer "The Handbook on Subject Committees" to prepare yourselves fully)

Other NGOs across Kerala too are attending this meeting with the subject committee in big numbers, this is a big opportunity for us to get our voices heard by the authorities and to prevent misuse of another upcoming law against men!.

Requesting friends to join us in big numbers, so that we can show our concern and seriousness in terms of our numbers too. Contact Gokul: 9633409355 or Sreekumar: 9446326794 for confirming your participation.

Tentative plan of visit: Leave Thrissur by 29th night to reach TVM by 10AM on 30th May. Leave TVM by night on 30th May.

*********************************
PS: Why we oppose this bill 1) Its not gender neutral, Men cannot take recourse of this law, if another man or woman does what is described as 'crime' in this bill 2) There is no misuse clause, as is the case with other widely misused women-protection laws.

"Peedanam"(Harassment/Violation of privacy and dignity of women, as if only women has privacy and dignity!!!) as defined in this bill is open to (mis)interpretation of the complainant, if she "feels" or "feigns" that she was violated(peedippikka pettu enna "thonnal"/ or "naatyam"!) the man is in soup.

There are no checks and balances especially when the 'crime-scene' setting is one to one, and its most probably than not one mans(woman-accuser) word against the another(the accused man). And in this law the word of a women is enough as proof(if she reports that the accused talked about her indecently/threatened to defame her, etc), which makes this law highly biased against men, as is the other women-protection laws which are being widely misused

Nowhere in this world does gender biased laws get implemented in such a large scale than in India. At least now that we know the situation and wide-spread misuse and losses due to such misuse ....why do we allow another biased law to be passed, when we know that its going to be misused!.

Laws for women mere paper tigers - Madhu Kishwar - The Times of India

Laws for women mere paper tigers - by Madhu Kishwar- View From Venus - Sunday TOI - Home - The Times of India

One of the great challenges for those concerned with strengthening women's rights in India is the alarming gap between legal prescriptions on women's issues and actual practices prevalent in society. Many people expect that as women become aware of their rights, they will inevitably move in the direction of following "modern laws" enacted for their benefit. However, there is growing evidence that even among the avante-garde elite groups of our country, social behaviour runs contrary to social legislation.

For example, ever since dowry was outlawed in 1961 through the Dowry Prohibition Act of 1961, the practice has flourished in an unprecedented manner. Wedding expenditures have become more and more lavish. Several new amendments were made to the Act and the Indian Penal Code during the 1980's making dowry giving and taking a cognizable offence. And yet, the practice has spread to regions, castes and communities which did not have any such tradition. The biggest dowry transactions take place among the families of educated elites, especially those in high power positions in the government. High status families consider it an insult to send their daughters off to their husband's home "empty handed."

It is the same story with the law banning the use of sex determination tests (SDTs). In Delhi, SDTs invites jail terms for up to 5 years and a fine up to Rs. 100,000. And yet, the use of sex selective abortions has grown even as the law has been made increasingly stringent. This is obvious from the continuing sharp decline in sex ratio and drop in the birth rate of female babies, especially among the well-off. Doctors in the know tell you that the most persistent and desperate demand for these tests comes from senior government officers.

It is legitimate to ask: Why are these laws not followed by the parliamentarians who make them or by the police officers and judges who are supposed to implement them? I am certain that not one among the militant feminists who have campaigned to get such laws enacted can claim with honesty that in their own family circles they have successfully "abolished" the practice of dowry and in their own community families are not taking recourse to sex selective abortions.

A common response is to attribute the growing gap between social legislation and social practices to hypocrisy and double standards. When a law fails, the tendency is to blame its failure on the laxity of implementation machinery.

That is how all the failed laws are bolstered with more and more draconian provisions, while the original problem remains unsolved. Today, we are witnessing a severe backlash against feminist legislation because most of the draconian laws we have enacted lend themselves to easy misuse while genuine victims rarely manage to get justice through them. This is not to say, I support the present system of dowry, sex selective abortions or other injustices faced by women but simply to underscore the need for a more self critical and socially sensitive approach to legal reform and the need to create appropriate instruments of the state machinery that can implement social legislation with dignity and honesty.

The writer is a professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies

Related links: http://uchalla.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/women-against-misuse-of-women-protection-laws-2/
http://www.aimpf.org/domestic-violence-act-or-demoralized-and-violated-act/#more-206