marraige law amendment bill protest

8/13/2019 Marraige Law Amendment Bill Protest

1/5

www.rollbackirbm.in

From ,

To, The Honorable

Sub :-. Strong Protest against the proposed MARRIAG !A"S #AM $%M $T& 'I!!and the se(ere a)ter e))e*ts that this hast+ pro(ision ill ha(e on masses.

Honorable Sir,

The +oung men o) India demand usti*e )rom a +oung male leader li e +oursel). "hat loo s as a *on(enient a+ to dispose o) the ongoing marital disputes in the*ountr+, hi*h is seeing a splurge in di(or*e *ases being )iled, *ontains a )e (er+dangerous pro(isions hose rami)i*ations *an be )ar-rea*hing and ta/ing )or the

so*iet+. This representation )rom me is to register a strong protest against *ertainse*tion o) the marriage la amendment bill hi*h a**ording to has got somese*tions hi*h are Anti Husband and ill on*e again e/pose onl+ the husband tothe hims and )an*ies o) his i)e0s de*ision and lead to this la being misused in*ollusion ith the other gender la s o) India li e se*tion 123a and the %4 a*t.

The Indian *iti5en ants to no h+ the go(ernment o) Indian bends o(erba* ards to appease some radi*al omen0s groups and *reates or appro(es la shi*h are totall+ un*onstitutional in nature as it does not respe*t Arti*les 61, 78,76 and 77 o) the Indian 9onstitution hen it *omes to married men. Married menare being o))ered a (er+ ra deal in the bill as their *onstitutional rights o) e ualit+be)ore la and a )air and )ree trial are being thoroughl+ eopardi5ed.

Government backed abuse against Indian husbands at the behest ofsome womens organizations

This bill see s to usurp at least ;8< o) the propert+ o ned b+ the husbandat the time o) di(or*e.

This bill also stands to den+ husbands the *han*e to oppose a petition o)di(or*e )iled b+ i)e under this la , hereas an e ui(alent po er rests iththe i)e.

This bill does not guarantee unlimited a**ess o) a man to ards his *hildren. This bill does not pro(ide e(en a semblan*e o) immunit+ to a man )rom other

legal pro(isions surrounding marriage i.e. it does not bar a i)e )rom )iling a*ase o) *ruelt+ against the husband under se*tion 123A = %omesti* 4iolen*eagainst the husband hile she see s to obtain a de*ree o) no-)ault di(or*e.

This bill *an literall+ render a man ban rupt as he ill )irst be e/torted b+ thepoli*e under a )alse *ase o) 123A IP9, then the i)e ill )ile a *ase under the%omesti* 4iolen*e A*t and see maintenan*e, *ustod+ o) *hildren and right

Page 6 o) ;


2/5

to residen*e, then again she *an still go ahead and )ile a *ase under Se*tion67; 9rP9 to see additional no-)ault maintenan*e and a)ter all this she

ill still be guaranteed o nership o) at least ;8< o) husband0s propert+ oran amount e ui(alent to it.

The e/tremel+ anti-male nature o) the Indian udi*iar+ puts the Indian men at

a position )ar pre*arious than one0s imagination as the udges, ho arehighl+ insensiti(e to ards men, ill )irst gi(e a a+ at least ;8< o) thehusband0s propert+ to i)e and then slap additional maintenan*e, alimon+and *hild support burdens onto the husband.

In su*h a *ase a man ill go ban rupt honoring *ourt orders and pa+inglitigation )ees and he ill lose his propert+ as ell.

SIFF predi*ts that su*h a treatment a**orded to men in marriages, )or no)ault o) theirs, and su*h (i*timi5ation o) men ma+ lead to rise in *rime in theso*iet+.

India committing the same mistake that China corrected !Alarmed b+ the e/tremel+ s +ro* eting di(or*e rate and )amil+ destru*tion ona**ount o) propert+ la the 9hinese Supreme 9ourt (er+ re*entl+ ruled that )romno on, the person ho bu+s the )amil+ home, or the parents ho ad(an*e themthe mone+, ill get to eep it a)ter di(or*e. In parti*ular, more than a third o) allmarriages in 'ei ing, Shanghai and Guang5hou no end in di(or*e, and the )astest-gro ing segment o) so*iet+ is those aged 7; to >1. Almost hal) o) all di(or*es seea *ourt s uabble o(er the )amil+ assets. ?I would choose a luxury house over aboyfriend that always makes me happy without hesitation, ? said one 71-+ear-old*ontestant on I) @ou Are the ne, one o) 9hinaBs most popular tele(ision datingsho s. ? And my boyfriend has to have a monthly salary of 200,000 yuan(1 ,!00", ? she demanded. 9hina and Indian ha(e the same sort o) demographi*sand people o) both 9hina and India su))er )rom the same le(el o) h+permaterialism.In su*h *ir*umstan*es the introdu*tion o) propert+ distribution la s based onsenseless )eminist pressure ould lead to a se(ere disruption in the so*iet+ and)amil+ s+stem.

The question of 5 "ro"ert# $ %estern law cou"led with Indian &eminist&anaticism is a reci"e for disaster.Ameri*an la s are no being blindl+ *opied in India. "ithout noting the belo)a*ts

Marriage and )amil+ as an institution has *ompletel+ )ailed in est ona**ount o) these la s and less.

!ess than 67< people ha(e stated that the+ ould be interested in marriageand o(er ;8< o) these marriage end in a di(or*e.

> in ; *hildren are )atherless . 6 in > Ameri*ans#668 million people& *arr+ se/uall+ transmitted disease.

# 9enter )or disease *ontrol data& 6

6 Se/uall+ Transmitted In)e*tions Among CS "omen and Men: Pre(alen*e and In*iden*e stimates,7883

Page 7 o) ;


3/5

"ith a su*h patheti* state o) a))airs in the est , India is tr+ing to blindl+ importsu*h la s at the insisten*e o) a )e radi*al omen0s organi5ations %o e ant todestro+ the Indian )amil+ s+stem has ser(ed us so ell )or 68,888 +earsD Theestern orld does not ha(e o(er E Maintenan*e la s

li e India does and neither does the est itness se(ere misuse o) la s li e 123ain India hi*h has been *alled as !egal Terrorism b+ the honourable supreme*ourt o) India. Ho e(er it is surprising to note that instead o) *urbing the misuse inthe other matrimonial la s thego(ernment has )or reasons no s nest to it has appro(ed the )ormation o) a neone, this one more dra*onian than the other. Indian Gender la s in parti*ular areso badl+ dra)ted that the+ out rightl+ e/*ludes e(en the possibilit+ o) a omanbeing the *ause o) an+ sort o) marital dis*ord. Irrespe*ti(e o) the )a*t on ho ispetitioning )or the di(or*e, it the husband ho is assumed to be one guilt+ o)brea ing the marriage. ust li e a i)e a husband also has e(er+ right to brea outo) an abusi(e relationship. "ith no legal re*ourse )or domesti* (iolen*e#%4& ormarital harassment#123a& li e a(ailable )or i(es the onl+ tool a(ailable )or Indianhusbands to sta+ separate )rom abusi(e i(es and to petition )or a di(or*e to end

the domesti* harassment. Ho e(er di(or*e is made pain)ull+ e/pensi(e )or Indianhusbands tr+ing to brea )ree )rom abusi(e i(es and this la is another step inthat dire*tion.

'obod# e(ce"t some feminist organizations feel that the law )ustified'arring a hand)ul o) )eminists groups spea ing in )a(or o) the la , e ould antto uote )rom media reports some o) *omments )rom a ide *ross se*tion o) theso*iet+. The *omments re)le*t the sho* e/pressed b+ the nation on this proposedamendment to a ard ;8< o) onl+ the husbands propert+ the i)e. The mediaarti*les are atta*hed as Anne/ure 6 and Anne/ure 7.a. #he wealthy or hi$h net worth individuals can be a tar$et% &e all know women

are not the only victims in marria$es these days% I have handled $old'di$$ersmyself #his is absurd ) - Mrinalini %eshmu h # minent !a +er&b. A law cannot be lopsided, favourin$ one side over the other * the le$islationhas to be fair and s+uare to all sides% therwise it would be ultra vires of the-onstitution )' Mrinalini %eshmu h # minent !a +er&*. ? #he proposed law is already instillin$ a fear pyschosis in men,) Siddharth Shah,a di(or*e la +er in Mumbai.d. #his is a bad le$islation,) Atindra Jumar Mu her ee, a senior di(or*e la +er in9al*utta, stressing that there0s ample s*ope )or abuse it ere to *ome into )or*e.e. .indu /arria$e aw Amendment ill is anti'men, will destroy Indian families Kehita(ada paper $agpur

). very year, over 32,000 married men commit suicide due to verbal, emotional,economic, and physical abuse and le$al harassment% #he suicide rate of marriedmen is double that of married women% ne married man is committin$ suicide inevery nine minutes% K Indian /press 'angalore

*emands

I demand that this la must not be passed in haste under insisten*e and illegalpressure )rom )e omen0s groups . A !arge national debate be held )or this la to

Page > o) ;


4/5

gather opinions )rom all se*tions o) so*iet+ and religion. Cntil then the la must berolled ba* . 'elo are the amendments that I demand as a *iti5en .

&unds advanced for "ro"ert# marriage should be "rime consideration+,haring liabilities must also be norm

The law must be G-'*- '-/T 01 to begin with equal rights to a manand woman for o""osing a divorce. In a marriage )unds ad(an*ed b+ thehusband or i)e should be the prime *onsideration on de*iding the rights gi(en on

the propert+ a* uired. In *ase the )unds are ad(an*ed b+ third part+ then theritten or un ritten (ie s o) the third part+ ha(e to be ta en. It should ho e(er bepresumed that )unds ad(an*ed b+ husbands relati(es ould be planned )orhusband and )unds ad(an*ed i(e0srelati(es should be treated as gi(en )or the i)e unless the third part+ negatesthis . An+ Gi)t gi(en b+ husband and his )amil+ to i)e should be ta en ortrans)erred ba* to husband and (i*e (ersa in hate(er *ondition ith an+maintenan*e or *ost o) trans)er to be on the person ho has ta es ba* the gi)t.Inherited propert+ should be treated as separate propert+ and should not behanded o(er to spouse. Ta ing into *onsideration the i)e should ha(e the right tosee di(ision into her an*estral propert+ # not inheritable & )rom her )ather andmother and see di(or*e.

The liabilities should belong to the person ho has ta en the liabilities and not o)the spouse e/*ept in *ase it be pro(en that the liabilities are ta en )or the spouse.I) a husband ta es a loan )or the i)e0s )ather0s illness then the i)e has to ta eo(er that remaining liabilities and (i*e-(ersa.

Prenuptial agreements= post nuptial agreement must be legali5ed so that no part+ma+ pro)it )rom a marriage.

*aughters must be given 5 of "aternal and maternal "ro"ert# at timeof marriage or when she is 23 #ears of age

mpo erment o) omen must not ait till her di(or*e . (er+ daughter mustautomati*all+ get ;8< o) her )athers and mothers propert+ so that all omen inIndia get empo erment irrespe*ti(e o) the )a*t i) the+ are married , di(or*ed or*hoose to remain a spinster. This ill also lead to non-burdening o) husbandsunne*essaril+ and ill pre(ent the marriage )rom be*oming a propert+ trans)erbureau

Condition of finishing all litigation before divorce is granted

"hile on one side e *omplain o) udi*ial penden*+ , in India a di(or*e *ase isnormall+ a**ompanied b+ at least 1 more *ases namel+, 9rP9 67; , HMA 71 , 9hild*ustod+, 123a, adulter+, domesti* (iolen*e, IP9 Se* ;8E and man+ more. Most o)the times multiple maintenan*e *ases , 123a and %4 are )iled together simpl+ toharass the husbands and his )amil+ members and to e/tort mone+ throughne)arious means. I) the *urrent la *omes into being in the present )ormat, this illlead to the i)e al ing out ith the di(or*e hile the husband ill still be stu* ina legal tangle o) *ases )or man+ de*ades. I demand that an amendment ill beinserted that de*ree o) di(or*e be granted onl+ hen all litigation in*luding but notlimited to *hild *ustod+ bet een the husband and the i)e has been resol(ed tothe satis)a*tion o) either o) the parties, ith the post *ondition that no part+ ill

Page 1 o) ;


5/5

initiate an+ other litigation against ea*h other on*e the di(or*e de*ree has beengranted.

Conclusion The so*ial impa*t in India o) the irretrie(able-brea do n *lause should berigorousl+ studied and atertight sa)eguards )or both genders in*luding *hildrenmust be put in pla*e be)ore it is introdu*ed. At a time hen both men and omenin India are in*reasingl+ )inan*iall+ independent, it is imperati(e that the terms o)the irretrie(able brea do n debate in India be e/panded to restore a )airbalan*e and the Adult0s rights o) either gender. !ets do hat0s right not hat someomen0s groups ant

Than s,

Page ; o) ;

marraige law amendment bill protest

Documents