Update: Tripti Nigam has responded in Times Of India, to allegations made by her husband Gaurav to the press that accused her of ” beating her husband”.
*********************************************
A news item about a wife who has taken Azim Premji, of Wipro to court over the ‘dating allowance’ being allotted to their employees in general and her husband Gaurav in particular, was an extraordinary example of how women are now willing to fight tooth and nail to ensure dignity for themselves and sanctity of marriage vows.
Tripti Nigam, who filed a suit against her husband Gaurav, who works in Wipro Technologies in Bangalore, and Premji, said the company’s dating allowance “showed their complicity in encouraging his extra-marital affairs .
I am not quite certain however about the validity of her claims. While one can concede that the said allowance may facilitate an already licentious partner into further venting his compulsions, yet its difficult to accept it as the sole cause of their ruined marriage.
What I also find incomprehensible is the logistics behind the ‘allowance’ per se. One has heard of ‘incentives’ but this is hard core bribing. I am sure Wipro does not have to indulge in such tactics to retain their employees. It might be a great attraction, nonetheless, if one was to analyse the behavioural trend of youth today. Loyalty towards a Company which almost tacitly accepts the emotional or physical needs of their personnel, is almost definitely ensured..Sixer.
It does concern society as a whole, if a) more companies follow the initiative b) if employees use it as leverage to stay on. Tripti Nigam has actually hit upon a booby trap which may get increasingly relevant as time progresses.
But this poses the question..Do men stray because they have the financial capability to do so? Is this therefore ‘the hurdle out of the way’ when contemplating extra marital affairs? Can one hope to keep a spouse under check by holding on to the purse strings? Is a loyal partner therefore , loyal only till such time that he is not conveniently disposed financially to pursue liaisons?
Befuddling questions..its as if one has opened the ‘pandoras box’ in this game of marriage. More than anything else, a certain sadness creeps in when one envisages this wife, with her two and a half year old son, in wait at home… while the husband, woos, wines and dines, in style, smiling his way through the evening, secetly blessing Azim Premji.
Sachiniti 
do you know that the anti women brigade has already set out vomitting their filth against this story of Tripti Nigam? They are predictable..and FUNNY!!!!!!!!!!!!
having money is not going to make a cheat out of a man..but lets face it a man has sex on his mind 24/7..some succumb others dont..those who are weak will definitely find this a boost.
Comment by neha — November 25, 2006 @ 12:39 pm |
Why demarcate it for married people in the first place???
There can be no denying the fact that a married man with a dating allowance might feel encouraged, nudged and called upon, to look for a date since all his colleagues are doing the same. The morality aspect does get watered down and relegated to the background..definitely.
As far as the SIF brigade, they may have issues but should be fair enough to admit that when on analysing decades of violence on women this act was a necessity.. The good it has afforded to genuine victims far out weighs its abuse. People misuse even property laws, does not mean one has to condemn the law, but boils down to setting up adjuncts to avoid lacunae.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — November 26, 2006 @ 1:33 pm |
Wake up Kaveeta.
You must have read the Newspapers today.
How the hell you say, Gaurav is adulterous?
I have counselled Gaurav after his parents were jailed for 3 days in April 2006 in an allegedly false case of “Dowry Harassment”.
The marriage is doomed.
Now, she has invented Dating allowanc story.
Women who file false cases must be jailed for 3 years for creating mischief.
Comment by Sumanth — November 26, 2006 @ 1:36 pm |
So you support jailing of old and innocent people in false cases?
Have you gone crazy?
You will realise when it happens to you own family and relatives.
Comment by Sumanth — November 26, 2006 @ 1:37 pm |
It is not the dating allowance, but the susceptibility of a decently paid software enginners across the country that is driving these evil women with nefarious designs to sue husbands and claim their hard earnerd money through legalised extrotion and blackmailng and eventually settleing into a huge alimony amount outside of court.
Comment by kkp — November 26, 2006 @ 2:14 pm |
For all readers of Sachiniti who are not aware, Sumanth is a member of the SIF an organisation which speaks for those who alleged being wronged by the 498A. Most times, bloggers disregard their comments and ignore their ascerbic tone.
Sumanth, first of all I wish you could speak without foaming at the mouth and after taking a deep breath read the article with YOUR MIND AWAKE. I have not made any allegations on Gaurav, merely quoted the report on the case, which is ubiquitous on the net.
Secondly, the issue is more to do with the fast growing phenoenon of ‘dating allowance’. It was brought to the fore because of Tripti Nigams claims in the court, who then thought it fit to summon Wipro officials.
The issue here is NOT 498a.. I do not wish to get into a long winding, never ending, heated, disrespectful debate with you on this , which it is apparently going to, noticing your tone and manner of approaching the subject and addressing me.
When you say that women who file false cases should be jailed for three years, I am in consonance with you completely. But for that the falsity has to be proven in a court of law. Till such time we are merely quoting a report and the action taken by the court, as of today. It would be premature to adopt a stand where the case is pronounced libelous, merely because the SIF thinks so.
On previous occasions I have entertained debates with your group only on grounds of ‘free speech’.. but it does not translate into a ‘free for all’, as on umpteen occasions, when other have descended on Sachiniti via a group mail from yahoo, get abusive, discourteous and downright disrespectful. If so, then I will have no recourse but to discontinue the dialogue.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — November 26, 2006 @ 2:18 pm |
This is nothing but new dimension of MISUSE OF DV LAWS, which RENUKA JI has gifted this Diwali. Till now DOWRY LAWS were misused heavily by blatant laws at the peronal levels, now they will be used professionaly. Wait few years, India will truely see the ill effects of these foolish laws.
Comment by Magadhesh — November 26, 2006 @ 3:11 pm |
The media, having long arms, should investigate the history of both-Tripti & Gaurav, their families and collect opinion of their friends, and on the basis of that, action be initiated for compromise to enforce harmony, instead of making a sensational story, so that the family may be saved from going to rocks.
However, if Tripti wants to be a ‘heroin’ of the Lib or any one of them is found to be having an affair, they should be left to their fate.
Chandra
Comment by Chandra — November 26, 2006 @ 8:03 pm |
Well, the 498 provisions have been around for a couple of decades, there have been perhaps no more than a couple of convictions amongst the thousands of cases. It is quite clear that the law itself has been utterly ineffective with helping real, but has been very effectively used as a tool to settle marital discord. Marital discord *is* a serious issue, but not quite something that merits a non-bailable warrant and years in the jailhouse.
We need a real debate to settle the real problem. Legislation at the behest of “angry people” will be counterproductive. We need someone with a cool head to figure out legislation (and the necessary procedures) with adequate safeguard for the alleged perpetrator of a crime. To assume someone guilty before proved so is a violation of a cardinal principle of natural justice.
Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is a well known indication of insanity.
Comment by Dev Abhishek — November 27, 2006 @ 12:34 am |
I cannot understand the contention which states that a woman wished to maliciously contrive to get money out of a rich husband by taking him to court with a kid in tow..If indeed that is the only purpose..wealth..why would not she prefer to live with him then? Why would she opt fr the rather tedious round about, stressful route of getting it via court proceedings?
I agree with your comment Dev..root out the problem of misuse effectively and definitely not by staged, angry utterances..they defeat the purpose of the protest.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — November 27, 2006 @ 11:21 am |
Kavita, if you want to know the truth, the family had been broken , when tripti had filed a false 498a and send her husabnds mother behind the bar ( as in UP no AB is there).
Then subsequently , Tripti in the merge of loos ethe case as 498A got stay order , as the she used to they used to stay at Bangalore and gaurave’s mother stay at Lauckwon.
Now , please tell me , if some one send your mother behind the bar without any fault , how you will go to save the family?
Which media try to hide .
But Gaurave in press conference celar the same and he had given the chanllenge in ZEE News , that if Tripti can prove any alligation , he will prefer to go to jail for 10 years instead of 4Years.
Any way , more than 37 News Papers had published the both view , let the whole nation decided waht is wrong and right.
As per me , If any one dare to abuse my mother , I will not forgive them and forget about sending them in jail .
We indian men are little different.
Comment by Swarup Sarkar — November 27, 2006 @ 12:40 pm |
‘Dating Allowance’ Ruined Marriage Alleges Tripti Nigam.. This is a big lie and the same exposed by Media subsequently.
Ruined Marriage – by a false 498a case , where she had send Gaurave’s Mother behind the bar for 3 days.
That is the reality.
She is in the merage of loosing all the case as High court allready put stay in her all alligations.
So she prefers to drag the Premji to ensure that Gaurave loose the job.
Let fight for Justice irrespective of any sex or caste.
Comment by Swarup Sarkar — November 27, 2006 @ 12:42 pm |
Two things are proved by this case;
1. DV act will also be misused like 498a.
2. Azim premji is a family breaker.
I am waiting for 2nd DV act on Azim Premji by Ms.Tripti Nigam wherein she will ask for share in property of Premji as her husband is his employee but not providing him residence.
Tripti can also put 3rd DV act on Premji for not providing s*x allowance because of which her husband denied it many times.
[Edited..Irrelevant and obscene]
Comment by Ram Balak — November 27, 2006 @ 4:05 pm |
As expected, the onslaught has begun..received a few more where the SIF brigade has resorted to comments which are at once illmannered, impolite, uncivil, unpolished..and most importantly , irrelevant.In short they are merely salivating at the mouth.
As warned earlier, I will now, not entertain any further comments by them on this blog.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — November 28, 2006 @ 9:56 am |
Times of India supplement Bombay Times today carried a front page story with Tripti Nigams snap and an interview with her first hand..excerpts of the article where she has responded to the allegations by her husband gaurav made to the press that” she used to beat him”.. Tripti responds:
“My husband’s gone astray because of the company norms. I don’t want a divorce, I want to live with Gaurav. It’s funny to hear the things Gaurav’s been saying, that I whipped him and beat him up. An educated man, who has travelled across the world… will he take such treatment from his wife? I am fighting for my son and myself. I will not let him get away with it.”
What is indeed qizzical is why would a husband not break up a marriage or in intiate a separation/divorce if he was being tortured? Why is he bringing it up now that the issue has become public? Why would he tolerate it, especially from a housewife who has no other means of support?
Comment by kaveetaakaul — November 29, 2006 @ 1:11 pm |
Latest Update for all of you.
—
Will be awating for the reply.
—
Comment by Swarup Sarkar — November 30, 2006 @ 3:03 pm |
Dear KavitaJI,
Yes, I am the victim in this case “Gaurav Nigam”.
As you already said why gaurav didn’t say anything before? To answer that yes I only filled a divorce case against Tripti on 21st Jan based on cruelty first and then all the false cases came from Tripti’s side.
And all the allegation from Tripti came later (Dowry, domestic violence, 406, 125, section 24 etc)
Now she is saying she wants to live with me. If you see all the allegations she made on me and my family are
1. Because of the dating allowance I had relationship with 6~7 females.
2. I am earning around 500,000 RS per month (as per Tripti) and still I tried to kill her for 500,000 Rs (My one month’s salary) dowry.
3. I am an alcoholic and used to beat her up for nothing everyday.
4. My parents used to beat her up everyday for dowry (5 Lakhs).
5. I never cared for my son and never gave any money to tripti.
Now I have a question for Tripti: Please identify what is the reason for the problem? As again she started saying that she wants to live with me.
After putting such allegation on me now she says she wants her husband back, It clearly shows
1. The authenticity of all her allegations.
2. Sita and Savitri ne is dharti pe pahli baar avtaar liya hai.
Rest you have to decide
Thanks for your time
Gaurav
Comment by Gaurav — December 2, 2006 @ 1:56 pm |
Dear Gaurav,
Thanks for writing in.
However I would like a small clarification. What I have gathered from reports is that you are supposed to be stationed in Bangalore..correct me if I am wrong.
Since this mail and its ip address reveals New Delhi,I was confused..I am sure you will appreciate I had to ensure that you are indeed Gaurav Nigam, prior to all else. If you like, we can exchange a few thoughts after I am convinced it is truly you.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — December 2, 2006 @ 3:34 pm |
Yes, I posted this message from delhi. You can reach me at gaurav_nigam@yahoo.com.
Thanks
Gaurav
Comment by Gaurav NIgam — December 4, 2006 @ 2:32 pm |
Kavita, your comments in post 10; I do not believe it to be the money. People with a sense of hurt (real or perceived) will respond in weird ways. It stands to reason that depriving someone of their liberty or wealth is effective harassment, and 498A is effective means to that end.
I’m not saying only women are capable of this, certainly not, men would happily resort to similar tactics they had a sweeping law at their disposal. IMO, a gender specific DV or cruelty law is archaic. There’s a wikipedia entry about domestic violence (ok, not a hugely credible source, but a start), which claims that about 50% of “domestic violence” is a euphemism for a brawl (i.e., no clear victim) and in the rest of the cases, the gender ratio of victims is a tossup.
If permitted conjecture, I’d think the propensity violence arises from being abused as a child (corporal punishment). If we wish to sort out this mess, that would be a good place to start. Sorry for the rambling …
Comment by Dev Abhishek — December 7, 2006 @ 2:15 am |
btw, I spelt your name incorrectly – sorry about that.
Comment by Dev Abhishek — December 7, 2006 @ 2:27 am |
Dear KavitaJI,
I was expecting some more valuable feedbacks here after the varification of my identity.
Plesae post some and let me know if you need some more information from my side.
Thanks,
Gaurav
Comment by Gaurav Nigam — December 7, 2006 @ 10:26 am |
Dear Gaurav,
Sorry for the delay. I have been mentally pre-occupied and rather perturbed by reports of ‘Baba Balnath and his monstrosities
..a post further up..and was busy setting up the wiki and other such support features.
Not that I have been oblivious to your post here. At the back of my mind the thought was niggling and hurting as well..a marriage gone awry is not a comforting event even for ‘outsiders’ like me, who only get to hear of it..you and your wife are living, breathing, the nightmare.
Yes..I did need a clarification from you.
“To answer that yes I only filled a divorce case against Tripti on 21st Jan based on cruelty first and then all the false cases came from Tripti’s side.”
According to what I have quoted above from your post, you seem to have filed proceedings first. Am I right? May I ask, what were the grounds? This is only to get a fair picture. Considering you had a tiny tot, the reasons must have been valid. I dont wish to intrude, but since you have asked me for my reactions, it would be unfair on my part to attempt a cursory,arbitrary approach
Dev Abhishek,
“It stands to reason that depriving someone of their liberty or wealth is effective harassment”..that in facts proves my contention. Wealth per se or desire of money cannot be the cause for a divorce but a ‘tool for harassment’ as you put it..yes.
To get to the bottom of ‘violence’ as a trait, is akin to attempting a thesis. Domestic violence, fairly assessed, should involve either spouse..most definitely. However, let us not in our subjective perception, risk adopting a blnikered approach which contributes to negating the basic physical disparities between man and woman, which in turn make violence against men a smaller percentage.
Unresolved conflict, imho, is a pain which tweaks joy out of a union which is meant to only be joyous and a partnership that spells progress. One sometimes perceives a lack of ‘marriage coaching classes’ for our youth, both boys and girls, which could iron out erroneous expectations from each other, while simultaneously stressing on the paramount mantras of ‘give and take’,’forgive and forget’and adoption of a mature stance which suggests that none of us are perfect, especially in a milieu of a marriage, where faults get amplified and virtues, taken for granted.
Once the disgruntlement sets in deep, then it is a free for all..498a’s and accusations, and a catch 22 situation where every action by either produces a more heinous and forceful re-action by the other. Soon its a battle of ‘who inflicts more pain’, in a relationship which was primarily meant to be a buffer against lifes challenges and woes.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — December 7, 2006 @ 11:25 am |
I agree with your assessment of what this does to relationships. But I have to disagree with your comments about physical disparity. When the intent is to hurt, size does not matter. By your metric, the bigger guy in a street brawl would always be culpable, and the smaller guy would go scot-free. Capacity for violence has very little to do with physical size.
As an aside, there was an article in NYT which theorised that we have perhaps imperiled the very institution of marriage by encumbering it with expectations beyond what’s healthy. It was an interesting article – I can post the link, but I think it requires a subscription to access it. If you have read it, or have access to it, perhaps you could let us have an Indian perspective.
Comment by Dev Abhishek — December 7, 2006 @ 3:49 pm |
Dear KavitaJi,
As already mentioned above, the reason behind my divorce petition was cruelty by my wife(section 13) I have already told many times recently how was my married life and what all problems I faced during that time.
All the cases (498a, 406, 2 cases for domestic voilence, maintance)came after my divorce petition.
Please let me know if you still need any other clairifications.
Thanks,
Gaurav
Comment by Gaurav — December 7, 2006 @ 4:33 pm |
Dev Abhishek,
Perhaps you have misunderstood me yet again. I was alluding to the ‘percentage’ of crimes against men, not the ‘capacity’. To be honest therefore if the physical capacity was in parity, the ratio might have been different.Violence and hatred as an emotion is not limited to either gender. But lets face it, despite all claims by the SIF group, cases of dowry deaths and physical torture are very much a reality..
Have you ever heard of a son in law being torched? This is in no way meant to be an attempt at justification of violence against men, perhaps a facet that deserves pondeing on and which might to some extent clarify the need of a domestic violence bill.
The phenomenon or rather unhealthy prevalence of burdensome expectations in a marriage is worthy of a separate post..maybe soon
Dear Gaurav,
Since you have applied for divorce first, I think this does alter the scenario to a great extent. Would you like to provide me with details, which you say you have given recently to other channels?
Since I have never and will never present a lopsided assessment of any given situation, once you provide me details of the case number and other such, I shall include it in the post above, as your statement..without any alteration whatsoever, thereby adding what the report failed to submit.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — December 7, 2006 @ 7:04 pm |
I think I did get the drift of what you were trying to say, but we are perhaps making slightly different points.
I’d not rely on guesswork and conjecture here. From what I’ve read, there seems to be fair bit of gender parity in victims of abuse. Just that men don’t come forward as often to complain, or even realise that they are being abused. If you have credible sources that tell a different tale, I’d be very interested in them. I’m willing to be corrected.
And, why just men and women? Torching women does stand out in India as forms of abuse go and deserves the press it gets. Any other abuse, be it that of children, workers, seniors – is relegated to insignificance. Why? There was this case of teacher hitting a child till the child bled from his scalp. Did the teacher go to jail? Not quite. Did he lose his job. Umm, no.
A small number of people, in every society, of every social strata, of either gender, of any political or religious persuation, shall have it in them to abuse others – whatever the motivation. There’s little point in trying to determine what type of people could be ‘predisposed’ to dish out abuse, and frame laws to a priori implicate that entire demographic set. That is exactly what we seem to have done in India.
Through all of this, the real victims continue to burn.
Comment by Dev Abhishek — December 8, 2006 @ 2:07 am |
Dev,
Its an oft repeated occurrence…bloggers missing each others contention..after all how much can one express in a few words. But no harm done ..dissension is progress provided its caried out with that motive.
Did you mean gender parity in DV? No, I dont have figures to subsatantiate my contention..but you have not provided the source or figures of your stand either 🙂
Torching of individuals in this case was cordoned off to the topic under discussion..with reference to marital discord. If you go throgh my posts in the relevant categories, crime on individuals from different walks of life have been dealt with as much passion and concern.
When you say” There’s little point in trying to determine what type of people could be ‘predisposed’ to dish out abuse, and frame laws to a priori implicate that entire demographic set. That is exactly what we seem to have done in India.”
I take it this is with reference to the Dv law armed with teeth, conspicuously targetted at the males of our society…Frankly its debatable.You mentioned earlier that convictions over the years have amounted to a neglegible number..if you so believe in justice of our land, the why worry? Especially if it benefits a few.
As far as ‘victims continue to burn”..what I get to hear and read is that there has been an appreciable diminishing of such incidents after the promulgation of the law. I am sure you will concur that sisters, mothers who are placed in situations of abuse, genuinely need protection from some to who a woman is not an entity worth according dignity, respect, or consideration.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — December 8, 2006 @ 6:07 pm |
Kaveeta, Hi,
I did earlier quote (a _somewhat_ credible source) on gender parity (or thereabouts) in DV. Here’s the link;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence
Portions of this article are disputed, but that’s hardly a surprise.
I guess we essentially agree that there’s a problem, but differ on the approach required to quell it.
And yes, it’s true that very few false cases end in conviction, which as you say, is a sign that the _judiciary_ is doing it’s job.
But, the process leading to acquittal is excruciating. I can’t divulge specifics about the case I have been witness to (at very close quarters) without violating someone’s privacy and confidence – but believe me, dealing with the process up until acquittal can leave the best of people scarred for life, sometimes physically.
It starts with the arrest, of the male and *all* his family members. Lawyers that specialise in 498, have a cookie cutter approach to such complaints. It’s almost as if they have a standard format. Believe it or not, I have seen a complaint that started off with accusing the male of philandering and in a later section asserted that he was impotent!
There’s typically months of delay before bail can be secured, unless a very smart lawyer (Rs. 20-50 thousand per hearing) is willing to plead the case. And, the bail can only be granted by the high court, so be prepared to do jail time till the high court finds a date.
How you’re treated in detention varies with individual police officers, and perhaps the accused’s local clout – but generally the accused are often physically and verbally abused in an attempt to intimidate and extract bribes. In this day and age, a visit to the jailhouse would almost certainly result in the loss of a job, let’s not even get started with credibility.
In the case I had seen, the police did NOTHING to secure evidence for a successful conviction. No medical checkup, no investigation, not even a cursory inspection of the house to gather evidence to corroborate evidence about alcohol and drug abuse. There was no surveillance conducted on the accused before an arrest – nothing.
A law with teeth, would be a law that requires the police to carry out a credible and proper investigation, not summary arrest and incarceration of everyone accused. When I asked the police officer if he had even made an effort to verify if the signature on the complaint was genuine, he seemed to take offense. It was as if the accused had ceased to be humans, and all their rights had been suspended! Giving this much power to the police is troubling, considering they haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory.
I do realise that it’s important to separate the victim from the accused so that they cannot browbeat or intimidate her into withdrawing accusations. However, there HAS to be a better way of doing this. It would make sense for a social worker to handle the case to counsel and assure the victim, and ensure that she gets all the help necessary. To get her used to the idea of a dissolved marriage and prepare her for life after. In the Indian situation, a woman faced with the prospect of divorce may feel so pushed into a corner, that she and her family may respond with harassment. We simply have to grow up enough to deal with the fact that marriages are fallible.
The drop in the cases of dowry deaths have more to do with the fact that greater number of women have chosen to empower themselves. We repeatedly hear stories of parents of girls refusing to marry into a family that demands dowry – as a society we became acutely aware of the problem we had, and learnt to work around it. I have grave doubts if a tough law had anything at all to do with it. After all, the law never substantially affected the sick people it was supposedly framed for.
Comment by Dev Abhishek — December 8, 2006 @ 7:55 pm |
Hi Dev,
Have gone through your post focussedly..am greatly perturbed by the contents, to say the least..Am a li’l tied up as of now..will post in reply asap.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — December 9, 2006 @ 10:55 am |
Dev,
To begin with I must tell you that your account has been stirring emotionally , for me. That a solution desperately begs for attention, is quite obvious.
The conundrum is ..how? To find the Buddhas middle path in situations of the kind where the pepetrator of the crime may or may not be the one summarily arrested and a womans life and dignity perhaps in danger, yet not ascertained, is a slippery slope. If the guilty manange to go scot free, then the purpose of the law is as if transformed into a mockery. Alternately if the law is being misused, maliciously and with grievous harm, then its deplorable as well.
I will not shirk from denouncing any woman who has chosen to ’empower’ herself by taking refuge in the loopholes that exist in this law. Empowerment is bringing to the fore the inherent spirit perhaps lying latent within and tapping its potential to the fullest. It is definitely not about twisting ones morals, no matter the compulsion and taking domestic matters to these objectionable lengths.
When you talk of marriage not being ‘infallible’ to be understood in its entirety by both partners,it is sad but true. However, the eternal romantic that I am, cannot but add that it might be so much more beneficial to both if they consider instead that humans are fallible, to enable a degree of understanding and acceptance from the deepest core. This can as if neutralise negative feelings that are bound to arise.
One cannot separate the law from the condition that led to its existence in the first place. That is where the dichotomy takes on a menacing shape. Its as if the present demographic of male population caught in this unhappy vortex is paying for the crimes of a generations of men gone by.
I must add here that those who had indeed suffered innocently would have found a host of backers and supporters in the ‘bloggermedia’, a term I have coined in complete conviction, had the SIF not taken on the offensive, aggressive, abusive stance across the board. Adopting tactics which include calling ‘ALL WOMEN’ supranakhas or men ravana, has lost them the golden chance of all of us wanting to pen our thoughts against this anomaly. They came across as a digruntled, frustrated. negative lot who had forsaken decency , civility, and protocal in their scheme or plan of action.
The fact that I have chosen to continue communication with you is representative of the fact that I was never as a person closed to the idea of a healthy exchange of ideas and discussion on the issue. What one recoiled from was the usage of terms like ‘feminazi’ easily and regularly used without provocation or reason, at every single instance, on every forum where they entered into debate. Therfore they lost out on sympathy or empathy towards their cause or even the slightest curiosity of their plight. Its as if they were en massse punishing the world for their personal misfortunes. Hardly a mature or advisable mode of behaviour on public fora.
Had they chosen to communicate in the manner you have, I can say without a shred of doubt, there would have been considerable headway made in their favour.
I would also like to reiterate that apart from the law which perhaps needs rectification, these conditions pronounce the urgency of methods that enable those to-be-married to learn, adopt, integrate a mature, level headed and practical approach to this liaison, which needs constant care, attention and nurturing for it to attain the level of satisfaction it is meant to provide.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — December 10, 2006 @ 12:17 pm |
Hi Kaveetha,
Thanks for the response. I think we increasingly find ourselves on the same page.
I do understand (but for certain do not condone) the misogynistic response of the folks at SIF – it’s hard to remain objective and level headed when put through the churner as quite a few of them have been. They perhaps are in as dire need of counseling and support as female victims of DV. That said, yes, they hurt their own cause, and the larger cause of gender relations by doing things in the fashion that they do.
As for the law itself – it was framed by the Rajiv Gandhi government in the 80s, when newspapers almost everyday reported dowry deaths. There was a compelling need then, to be *seen* to be doing something, quickly. As you might agree, things done in a hurry are rarely well thought through.
I would easily agree that extreme situations need extreme measures. Laws related to terror crimes are a good example – the TADAs and the POTAs – but they have rightly been limited in their geographical scope, and there’s always a “time out” clause – where parliament is forced to look at the utility of these laws after a while.
We could ask ourselves – do we need the 498 in Kerala, a largely matrilineal society where women are adequately empowered? Should we burden that state with a law designed essentially for the northern belt?
Perhaps, the 80s was a time when such a law was necessary for a period of time. As I observed earlier – society would move to fix itself, but that change is slow – to prevent deaths was an immediate imperative. The law however, should have been equipped with time-lapse clause and provisions mandatory periodic reviews. In the meantime, society moved quickly (perhaps too quickly), and the 80s seem like a distant and dramatically different world today.
Tomorrow’s generation might hear of dowry deaths about as infrequently as we see the ‘sati’ today (i.e., it shall be the sole preserve of a tiny lunatic fringe). But, they may still be burdened with an archaic law that creates untold gender fissures.
As a hypothetical exercise, allow me to frame a law to solve a real problem that we have today. When prevented from burning brides, we misogynist Indians have been killing female foetuses at an unprecedented rate. Nipping the “problem” in the bud, as it were. IMO, the biggest social problem we have today. The gender imbalance would suggest that a population collapse and resulting civilisational decay is inevitable, and not in the too distant future.
Desperate for a solution, I, as a law maker, put in a draconian law to Jail without recourse to any relief, without evidence, and with the presumption of guilt, any woman and her entire family that is purported to have “lost” a female foetus, by any means, natural or clinical. 10 years in the cooler all around, at the minimum.
The law doesn’t care if;
a)it was a genuine miscarriage
b)there were sound medical reasons for the procedure
c)it was an unwanted pregnancy, regardless of foetus gender
The burden of proof remains with the woman and her family, *they* and not the prosecution, are required to establish that the loss was inevitable. As I said – I’m trying to address a very real problem, IMO the biggest problem we face as a nation, my intentions are entirely noble. Now;
1) What does this do to womens’ reproductive rights?
2) How many couples might consider pregnancy a grave risk to their indvidual liberty (just as men might today consider marriage a risk)
3) How does this stress our social fabric?
4) How many innocents will do jail time, just because we couldn’t figure out how to fix the folly of a criminal few?
Changes to the criminal code are passed with so little discussion in parliament, let alone public debate. I wonder how many people are even aware of their implications. As a people, we are happy to hand a corrupt police unbridled power in the hope that crime shall go down. We have to be extremely careful, we might just about end up enthusiastically building a Kafkaesque state.
Comment by Dev Abhishek — December 11, 2006 @ 5:17 pm |
Kavita..interesting turn out.
any way if you like go through some “Red allert Video” of Star News , attach in the link.
Star News : Red Allert Video – Misuse of 498a
Please understand,all women does not born in Raja Harish Chandra Family.
But the attempet to establish a “Women’s” Verbal statement is sufficient to punish any X,Y,Z .may we can accept such injustice, but the problem is, when the same calim by another Women like in the form of Mother/sister the same had not considered at all.
Wonder why this double standard!!!!
Any way , the Indian Women slowly loosing thier respect in the eyes of Men as well as media since last two years ( before that I have wittness very few programe like this).
Whole sale protection of Bad women is not women empowerement, if the same continue the Backlash is certainly going to happen.
This is my view, may be I am the most stupid person of this world , as I say we must save the “Instituion of Marriage” for a Civilized society.
Marriage is a Civil matter and the same to be resolved as per Civil LAW , as criminal case is not a Joke or ordering PIZZA.
Yes I am very harsh , but that is the reality.
Sory in advance if it hart some one.
P.S. Presently Gaurave shifted to Delhi form Bangalore . Thanks to his employeer to support him to fight for justice.
Comment by Swarup Sarkar — December 12, 2006 @ 1:30 pm |
Hi Dev,
Misogynism coupled with ad hominem assaults, necessitate an analysis into the order of its appearance. Was it a trait before marriage, during or as a result of a breakdown…if you know what I mean.
As for. your hypothesis on a bill indicting those to do with female infanticide, your fears are valid and well founded. However, there is a telling difference between this and the Dv. In the case of the latter, there has to be third party involved..that is the whole contention, as it were. The war is not between a law and the people, as in your example, but of an individual against another and the recourse to a law…fundamentally varied instancing.
I would not be as worried as you are on the emergence of a ‘Kafkaesque’ state. An aware citizen, or lets say, a resurgent exercise in citizen rights, along with a supportive media, can eliminate the problem or atleast limit it to areas where illiteracy, and backwardness is as rampant as poverty and hunger. The high handedness of police officials is a truism albeit restricted and under surveillance because of media and public censure.
I am hopeful of the blogger media playig a pivotal, relevant and incisive role in curbing situations which stem out of corruption and abuse. The citizen, if honest and fearlesss, is bound to be taken seriously by even the miscreants. I have single handedly, in the face of extreme threat to life, taken on a builder, attempting to dupe me of my property and have received complete co-operation frm the Police officials from the top brass to the lowest..So there is hope..yet.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — December 12, 2006 @ 2:37 pm |
Media can Make a Semi Dad man to a alive Person and at the same way Media can send a alive person in the cold fredge.
We can’t underestimate media Power, where the trail by media is not a Punishable offence.
Regarding Kavita I would like to stick to the article about your this only, seek a correction in your heading , as Tripti herself withdran the case against Premji , hence her alligation does not justify :
‘Dating Allowance’ Ruined Marriage Alleges Tripti Nigam.
Rest upto you, truth can’t be hide so long.
Comment by Swarup Sarkar — December 12, 2006 @ 4:50 pm |
“As far as the SIF brigade, they may have issues but should be fair enough to admit that when on analysing decades of violence on women this act was a necessity..”..regarding your comment at start :-
Kavita read the SIF proposed “Domestic Harmony Act” instead of “Domestic Violence Act”.
Justice/Punishment as per crime the same can’t be defined by the LAW in some assumption .
Comment by Swarup Sarkar — December 12, 2006 @ 4:56 pm |
Hi Kaveeta,
I too have come across exceptional conduct from police officers, and I should, in all fairness, have pointed that out. The trouble is that we often fail to recognise the good, and tend to over-emphasise the evil. That can only demoralise committed folks in the force, and wouldn’t be in the least fair.
But it is a fundamental fact that power without any oversight does tend to corrupt. We do have to keep this in mind.
Comment by Dev Abhishek — December 12, 2006 @ 6:36 pm |
Kavita JI,
Its time to revisit this news / story.
What happened to our Jhansi ki Rani “Tripti Nigam”?
Where is she and where is our poor Gaurav?
Comment by Amit — May 13, 2007 @ 4:03 am |
If you have read through the comments Amit, you might have noticed that I had invited Gaurav to share his part of the story, to give details of the court case which he claimed to have filed before Tripti. But sadly there has been no response. The media has not brought to the fore any details of Tripti and the case.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — May 13, 2007 @ 1:26 pm |
Kavita
Can we ever a belive a false accuser whos falsehood has been proven ?
why are you not advocating that she be punished for misusing the law.
If you are “not certain on validity of her claims” inspite of seeing so much evidences. I can only pity you and pity India for having such citizens
Comment by bharati — May 28, 2007 @ 12:12 am |
Thank you Bharati for your encouraging words.. I am still to decide who is more pitiful..India for having citizens like me as you suggest or like you who sits in Canada and pretends to be concerned..
If you had spent some time and gone through the thread in detail, you might hav bitten your words. Where is the proof of her falsehood? I am a neutral person.. welcoming both sides to present their story but if people like you despite physical absence have reached their conclusions before the courts have then all I can say is “get off the high horse and get real”. I would have been the first person to condemn her had there been any news of her having made ‘false claims’. Neutrality has its ethics..perhaps bias and prejudice will disallow that..alien to you?
Heard of the term ‘substantiate’?
Though I am almost certain you are one of the Von siffers.. a term my friend Temporal has coined for misogynist ad hominem attackers of the SIF. yet I have included your comment.
Either prove your arguments or dont waste my time.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — May 28, 2007 @ 12:36 am |
Kavita ,
you asked a question “why would a man not file for divorce when his wife beats him” .For which you got that answer in this case that it was done .
But there are following why men do not file divorce case.
1. Men are re-abused in the court system
2. Every man who files for divorce case faces a jail for some time using a false dowry case.
3. The learned practical experience without paying a reverse dowry a dicroce is not given
4. It takes our courts upto 14 – 20 years to grant by that time it loses its meaninig. What use is a divorce to a 50 year old man which was use when the man was in 30s
5. Social responsibility : such women should not be allowed to spoil some other mens life.
6. Divorce is nothing but a paper allowing you to be remarried . The men who may be going through such horific experience may not be intrested in marrying in other words divorce has not meaning such
7. They are cut from the children . Indian legal system is notorious in husband circle for given 1 hour a month visitation
8. Lack of faith in the legal system which means there is feeling that ther is not point in going to the legal systems.
The reality of the fact is that men are running away from the courts seeing that their rights are not protected and justice needs are not being met.
I am looking for reasons why people like you who claim are reasonable are not finding the central point of the story that is the person making such eailiy disproven false accusation
It is not enough to say person making false accusations should be punished but when it is proven to say that such and such person should also be proven .
The dialogue can occur when you do not try support those whose allegations are laughable and proven to be completely at fault.
When the innocents who have been exhonerated in dowry cases by courts say there is no point in filing. It is time to listen to them instead of trying to accuse them of something .Otherwise a pray that I went for dialogue is just that an empty statement.
Comment by bharati — May 28, 2007 @ 12:38 am |
The above comment overlapped mine.. so is redundant.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — May 28, 2007 @ 12:43 am |
Merely because I am right now in Canada ( you r correct ) does not mean I am not
1. Indian citizen
2. I am an NRI which I am not.
Simple Allegations
1. Wipro gives dating allowance
Refution
1. By wipro
2. Hr policies
3. By ex wipro employees. I am one of them
is sufficient to prove that the person made a false allegation .
The fact that this person is educated is sufficient to proove that she cannot be deluded
Comment by bharati — May 28, 2007 @ 12:45 am |
Refuted by the accused..thats one sided..not proven in a court of law!!
Please dont be ridiculous.. I asked for substantiation not ‘claims’ .
If a modicum of decorum is not maintained, your posts will be deleted.
Comment by kaveetaakaul — May 28, 2007 @ 12:55 am |
To delete or not delete is your prerogative and right .
The quality of evidence that is there for disproving the statement that “wipro gave dating allowance ” is unshakable and beyond reasonable doubt.
Court of law is only one of the forums for proving.
This is good example on the ridiculous extent of false claims that are being made in the Indian courts
It is however your perogative take a stance that “wipro must have given dating allowance”
I would however have to comment that this is not a reasonable stance to take.
Comment by bharati — May 28, 2007 @ 2:36 am |
If issues are going to be decided by laymen like you and me then where is the need for courts!!??
Comment by kaveetaakaul — May 28, 2007 @ 11:08 am |
kavitha,
I am sure whatever information I will provide you will ask for more & portray like I am not giving the information.
If you read all my post here, you will find that I have given all the information asked by you.
Why you are not ready to digest that?
You have to accept that here the laws are being misused by Tripti.
-Gaurav
Comment by Gaurav — February 20, 2008 @ 7:52 pm |
Gaurav your accusations are false and totally unfounded.
First of all let me express my serious doubts whether in fact you are Gaurav or somebody with vested interests posing as him from the SIF brigade or wherever.. The reasons are threefold.
1) My name is ‘Kaveetaa’ and not ‘Kavitha’. Only a south Indian would spell it this way which Gaurav is not. In fact in all of his earlier posts he has referred to me as Kaveetaji.
2) The tone of the comment is most unlike Gaurav who has always come across as fairly reasonable.
3) The ip address is from Mumbai. Gaurav was in Delhi or then in Bangalore.
So without a shred of doubt let me demolish your claim of being Gaurav.
Now coming to your arbitrary and unreasonable comment.I dont know either Gaurav or Tripti from Adams and neither am I a represenatative of any feminist, non feminist, family saving group. The sole purpose was to present the story sine qua non and without any motive, whatsoever. It does not benefit me in any manner to lambast Gaurav or protect Tripti and which is amply clear if you un biasedly read ALL of my comments and the original post.
Gaurav merely claimed that he had filed the case on Tripti before she did. I repeatedly requested him to furnish details like case no, date, place of admission etc which he HAS NOT furnished.
Now why are you ( whoever you are) and whatever your motive of coming here almost 8-10 months after the said episode may i ask you why are you not ready to digest the truth that there seems to be some kind of covert untruth in operation here?
Comment by kaveetaakaul — February 20, 2008 @ 8:33 pm |