In these exigent hours of Covid pandemic, the doctor-patient relationship has suddenly come in the eye of storm. The hapless patients are seen left at the mercy of doctors and hospitals. Allegations of medical negligence are surfacing day in and day out.
Medical profession is considered as one of the noblest professions as medical practitioners are at helm of life and death of the ailing. They are charged with the most sacred duty of saving the lives of patients through their reasonable care, skills, expertise, knowledge and experience. Since time immemorial, doctors are morally obliged to exhibit due diligence and care while extending treatment to their patients. They were once administered Charak’s oath (1000 BC) and the Hippocrates Oath (460 BC).
Nevertheless, unscrupulous persons are in every profession and medical is no exception. Whenever doctors have shirked their responsibilities that emerge from doctor-patient relationship, they are bound to face legal implications arising out of it. The doctor-patient relationship presupposes obligations and consequent liability of doctor to the patient. This relationship is based on – 1. Patient’s express or implied request for medical services & 2. Doctor’s acceptance of that request.
After acceptance of such a request, however, if a doctor fails to render proper services through reprehensible ignorance or negligence that follows injury or loss to the patient, then it amounts to medical negligence. He can be held liable in civil or criminal jurisdiction for the same depending on the nature of negligence.
Judiciary has been very vigilant when it comes to cases of medical negligence. It’s because medical negligence is a direct lethal blow to Article 21 i.e. Right to life and liberty. Furthermore, most often the loss suffered by patients and their relatives due to medical negligence is irreparable and irrepayble.
The infamous AMRI Hospital, Kolkata medical negligence case wherein Hon’ble bench of Supreme Court comprising Justices C.K. Prasad and V Gopala Gowda had awarded a whopping compensation of 5.96 crore to Mr.Kunal Shah, the husband of deceased Anuradha Shah proved to be nail in the coffin of all unscrupulous doctors who had reduced their hospitals to money-minting centers putting the lives of patients at risk. Three senior doctors of AMRI hospital namely Dr.Sukumar Mukherjee, Dr B.N.Halder, and Dr. Balram Prasad were also held liable for the fate of the patient. The judgment proved landmark as it reset the standard of medical care in India.
In NIMS, Hyderabad medical negligence case too, a patient named Prashant Dhanaka was awarded a record compensation of one crore who had faced the consequences of medical negligence in a surgery which led to irreparable damage to his spinal cord and he was made wheel-chair bound thereafter.
It’s worth mention that Supreme Court has already pronounced that medical negligence can also be tried under Consumer Protection Act, 1986. In the significant ruling in Vasanth Nair v Smt.V.P.Nair(1991), it has been reiterated that ‘patient is a customer’ and ‘medical assistance is a service’.
Doctors as professionals are under a duty to act when they accept a patient for treatment. In such cases, even their omission to do is bound to make them liable. A doctor is expected to follow generally accepted professional standards while performing his task. People who possess such superior ability or knowledge are held to a higher standard of care than those who don’t.
No doubt, a doctor doesn’t promise a particular result of cure to his patients, yet he is expected to possess the skill-sets, learning, and expertise of the profession commonly possessed by the members of the profession who are considered to be in a good standing. There are two standards to assess the credibility of standard of skills possessed by a doctor-
1. National Standard- Does the doctor have and use the equipment, knowledge, and experience that doctors have and use nationally?
2. Local Standard- Does the doctor have and use the equipment, knowledge and experience that doctors have and use locally where the doctor practices ?
If a doctor has promised a particular result of cure to his patient and it does not follow, then there is a breach of warranty or a breach of contract action. It’s irrespective of the fact that doctor was not negligent when performing the services during treatment. An opinion concerning a likely possible result of a treatment does not constitute a promise or guarantee.
A doctor and patient share fiduciary relationship. He is also not an infallible person like all of us, yet the degree of skill exercised by him is expected to be of reasonable competence, if not of highest level in that branch which he practices. There is a duty of care which a doctor owes towards his patient. If there is breach of duty then under certain circumstances, it would amount to negligence. The consequences of such negligence may be civil or criminal.
The term ‘negligence’ though not defined anywhere in the code, yet ‘good faith’ has been defined in Section 52 of Indian Penal Code,1860. It reads as- “Nothing is said to be done or believed in good faith which is done or believed without due care and attention. A doctor is expected to do everything related to his patient during treatment in ‘good faith’. So a negligent act is contrary to good faith. Thus, it was held in Mahadev Prasad Kaushik v. State of U.P. AIR 2009 SC 125 that ‘negligence is omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs would do, or doing something which a reasonable and prudent man would not do’.
In Jacob Mathew v State of Punjab (2005) 6SCC 1, the supreme court bench of CJI R.C.Lahoti, Justice GP Mathur, and Justice PK Balasubramanyam had dealt the issue of liability of medical professionals for negligence under civil and criminal law. The case was related to CMC hospital , Ludhiana wherein a patient was admitted with difficulty in breathing. Dr. Jacob Mathew and Dr. Allen Joseph were alleged to have put empty Oxygen cylinder to the patient. The son of patient had somehow managed to get another gas cylinder, but the doctors failed to make gas cylinder functional in time which had costed the life of patient.
The JMFC, Ludhiana had framed charges under section 304 A of IPC,1860 against these two erring doctors. The duo had filed a petition in the High Court to quash the FIR, but it was dismissed. An appeal to Supreme Court was thus moved by special leave.
The apex court had held that- it is the amount of damages incurred which is determinative of the extent of liability in tort, but in criminal law, it is not the amount of damages, but the amount and degree of negligence that is determinative of liability. In criminal negligence, inter alia, Mens Rea is an essential ingredient. To hold the existence of criminal negligence, the rashness has to be of such a degree as to amount to taking a hazard knowing that the hazard was of such a degree that injury was most likely imminent. The grossness or degree that distinguishes a negligence ‘actionable in tort’ and a negligence that is ‘punishable in crime’ is that it has to be of a very high degree. Thus it’s the ‘degree of negligence’ plus ‘Mens Rea’ test that is required to make medical acts as criminally negligent.
Justice R.C.Lahoti ruled in this case that – Negligence in the context of medical profession necessarily calls for a treatment with a difference. So long as the doctor follows a practice acceptable to the medical profession of that day he cannot be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative course or method of treatment was available or simply because a more skilled doctor would not have chosen to follow or resort to that practice or procedure which the accused followed. It was thus held that a case of criminal negligence was not made out against doctors under 304 A of IPC, 1860. The hospital was though held liable in civil law.
In Syed Akbar v. State of Karnataka(1980) 1 SCC 30, it was ruled that where negligence is an essential ingredient of an offence, the negligence to be established by the prosecution must be culpable or gross and not a negligence merely based upon an ‘error of judgment’.
The Bolam Test of Medical Negligence as set out in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee(1957), 2 ALL ER 118 also remains a traditional test to determine the culpability of a medical practitioner. It states that ‘a doctor is not negligent if what he has done would be endorsed by a responsible body of medical opinion in the relevant specialty at the material time. This test has been but criticized to be too protective to clinical staff. On the top of it, it doesn’t permit judges to choose between competing expert views.
The doctors can be charged to commit a ‘battery’ if they make physical contact with any part of the patient’s body without his consent. They must obtain an ‘informed consent’ from the patient or the person who is in charge of patient. Moreover, the patient must be informed of the risks associated with the treatment that was rendered. Failure to inform the patient about the probable risks involved during treatment/operation prevents him from being able to make an intelligent and considered decision on what treatment to seek or whether to have an operation.
Hospitals often use consent forms for providing information as well as avoiding liability. In Samira Kohli v Dr. Prabha Manchanda case, it was held by apex court that surgical removal of uterus and ovaries from the appellant’s body who was having menstrual problems without her ‘informed consent’ was an unauthorized invasion and interference with the appellant’s body. This had amounted to tortious act of assault and battery and therefore deficiency in service. A doctor can however at times give treatment to patient without his consent depending on factors such as seriousness of patient’s condition, availability of time, extent of emergency, et cetera.
It’s imperative to understand that even making out a case against a doctor under 304 A i.e. causing death by negligence, the two elements either of which or both may be proved to establish guilt are ‘rashness’ and ‘negligence’. Such a negligence and rashness must be attributable to state of mind to be made punishable. Section 304 A provides for cases where death is caused by doing a rash or negligent act which doesn’t amount to culpable homicide not amounting to murder within the meaning of section 299 or culpable homicide amounting to murder under Section 300 of IPC. Thus, Section 304 A excludes all the ingredients of Section 299 as well section 300.
304-A applies to those cases where there is no intention to cause neither death nor knowledge that the act in all probability will cause death. It applies to only such acts which are rash and negligent. If doctor is found guilty under 304A, he can be punished for imprisonment for 2 years and fine. The other Sections of IPC such as 52, 80,81, 83,88,90,91,92, 337 and 338 also cover acts of medical malpraxis.
Moreover, the burden of proving medical negligence of doctor is upon the complainant/ prosecution. Meaning thereby, he has the task of convincing the court that his version of facts is correct one.
The ‘expert opinion’ plays a crucial role in deciding medical negligence of a doctor.(Sethuraman Subramaniam Iyer v Triveni Nursing Home and anr.,1998)
The doctor and patients are often at loggerheads. No doubts it’s important to protect the doctors from floodgates of medical claim as mankind has received greater benefits from their services than their cost of errors we’ve borne. The medical fraternity also needs to adhere to the Code of Medical Ethics laid down by MCI under Indian Medical Council Act,1956. The Act also consists of chapters relating to disciplinary actions for professional misconduct. The movies like ‘Ankur Arora Case Files’ and ‘Deadline- Sirf 24 Ghanta’ acted as eye opener for unscrupulous doctors recently.
According to Justice R.C. Lahoti, negligence in the context of medical profession necessarily calls for a treatment with a difference. So long as the doctor follows a practice acceptable to the medical profession of that day he cannot be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative course or method of treatment was available or simply because a more skilled doctor would not have chosen to follow or resort to that practice or procedure which the accused followed. It was thus held that a case of criminal negligence was not made out against doctors under Sec 304 A of IPC, 1860. The hospital was though held liable in civil law.
The Daily Guardian is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@thedailyguardian) and stay updated with the latest headlines.
For the latest news Download The Daily Guardian App.
Woman Can Be Granted Bail For Non-Bailable Offence Even If It Is Punishable With Life Sentence/Death Sentence: Karnataka HC
While explicitly observing that it is not the law that bail should always be denied in a case where the offence punishable is of death or life imprisonment, the Karnataka High Court has as recently as on May 12, 2022 in a recent, refreshing, robust and rational judgment titled Nethra vs State of Karnataka in Criminal Petition No. 2306 of 2022 and cited in 2022 LiveLaw (Kar) 169 granted bail to a woman accused of murdering her husband. A single Judge Bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna allowed the petition filed by one Nethra and granted her bail relying on Section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). It must also be mentioned here that the Court made it clear that in terms of Section 437 of the CrPC, bail can be granted in a non-bailable offence on three circumstances as depicted in the proviso, (i) a person below 16 years of age, (ii) a woman and (iii) a person who is sick or infirm.
To start with, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by a single Judge Bench comprising of Justice M Nagaprasanna of Karnataka High Court sets the ball rolling by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “The petitioner is before this Court seeking enlargement on bail in C.C.No.252 of 2022 arising out of Crime No.530 of 2021 registered for offences punishable under Section 302, 120B and 34 of the IPC, it having been turned down by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural in Criminal Miscellaneous No.2009 of 2021, on 17.02.2022.”
To put things in perspective, the Bench then while briefly stating the facts envisages in para 3 that, “The facts in brief are as follows:-
The petitioner is accused No.1. It is the case of the prosecution that on 07-11-2021 at about 1.30 a.m., the complainant, father of the deceased registers a complaint for offences punishable under Section 302 of the IPC, which becomes a FIR in Crime No.530 of 2021. The complaint was that he had two daughters and a son who are all married and his two daughters are no more. His son Palar Swamy was into real estate business. He had two children from the wedlock. About 6 years ago his son Palar Swamy had married one Nethra, the petitioner herein allegedly without the knowledge of his family and had also a child from the said marriage. His son had set up a house in a different locality to reside with the petitioner and was also visiting the house of the complainant. Three years prior to the incident, the son Palar Swamy had purchased two acres of land and developed the same into sites. He had constructed a house in the said developed sites and was residing there with his alleged second wife – the petitioner. The purchase and decision to reside with the second wife became a subject matter of quarrel between the members of the family. It is the case of the complainant that on 06-11-2021, Palar Swamy came to the house of the complainant and had enquired about his health and on the same day, the complainant had tried to call Palar Swamy after 11 p.m. after his dinner but Palar Swamy had not answered the calls. Apprehending some problem for his son, the complainant goes to the house of Palar Swamy at about 12.10 (night) and found the door opened and the petitioner who was holding some weapon in her hand ran away seeing him. Later, the complainant finds his son lying dead on the bed in his room and his head was bleeding. This was narrated in the complaint and a case of murder was registered against the petitioner and one Vijay Kumar, son of petitioner’s sister. On registration of the crime, the petitioner was taken into judicial custody and is in the custody from 08-11-2021. On getting arrested, the petitioner moved an application for bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. during the pendency of investigation itself. Bail application was not considered. The Police after investigation filed their final report/charge sheet on 25-01-2022. The application for bail was taken up later on 17.02.2022 and dismissed notwithstanding the fact that charge sheet had been filed in the matter on the ground that the offence committed was punishable with death or life imprisonment. Rejection of the application is what drives the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition.”
Needless to say, the Bench then observes in para 6 that, “I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and peruse the material on record.”
It would be germane to note that the Bench then specifies in para 7 that, “The afore-quoted chain of events is not in dispute. The petitioner is the alleged second wife of the deceased as is also borne out from the records. Quarrel between the wife and the husband is also a matter that is on record. There are no eye witness to the incident is again borne out from the records. Therefore, it is a case where the prosecution has to prove the offence beyond all reasonable doubt, that the petitioner has actually committed murder of the deceased by a weapon. It is also the material on record that quarrel between the husband and the wife took place for the reason that the deceased had pestered the petitioner to have physical relationship with one of his friends in his office and further on 06-11-2021, when the petitioner had asked her husband with whom he was going to travel outside, the answer was that he was travelling with other girls, this again resulted in serious quarrel between the two and the result of quarrel appears to be the reason behind the gruesome act. It is also a matter of record that the petitioner herself went and surrendered before the Police.”
Briefly stated, the Bench then most remarkably after elaborating on Section 437 of CrPC goes on to state aptly in para 8 that, “In terms of Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. bail can be granted in a non-bailable offence on three circumstances as depicted in the proviso, (i) being a person below 16 years of age, (ii) a woman and (iii) is sick or infirm. The petitioner is a woman. She is entitled for consideration under Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. Before applying the aforesaid provision to the facts of the case and considering the case of the petitioner for enlargement on bail, it is germane to notice application of the said provision by coordinate Benches of this Court all in the case of offences punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and they being women. A coordinate Bench of this Court in KAVITHA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA – Crl.P.No.2509 of 2019 decided on 05-08-2019 has held as follows:
“2. The complainant by name Smt. Indirani lodged a complaint stating that, she had two sisters by name Parvathamma and Baby and three brothers by name Vijay Kumar, Subramani and Manjunath. The said Subramani was residing along with his brother Vijaya Kumar and his wife Smt. Kavitha along with another sister i.e., Baby and her two sons. The other brother Manjunath was residing along with his wife and children separately. In this background, it is alleged that, on 2-01-2019 at 2.00 p.m. the husband of the petitioner/accused by name Vijayakumar telephone to the husband of the complainant stating that the deceased Subramani is dead. Thereafter, all these persons came to the house of Vijayakumar and saw the dead body of the deceased Subramani and suspected his death. Hence, after the post-mortem examination they came to know that Subramani died due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. On the basis of such information, the complainant lodged a complaint against the petitioner, which initially came to be registered in UDR No.2/2019 and thereafter in Crime No.5/2019 for the offences punishable under Section 302 of IPC and the police after thorough investigation, laid charge sheet against the petitioner/accused.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, there are many people residing in the said house. The entire case revolves around the voluntary statement of the petitioner/accused – Kavitha that, she informed her husband and others that she actually tried to wake him up but, he did not wake up and she noticed that he was dead. Therefore, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that, actually the petitioner/accused has committed the murder of the deceased by strangulation. It is also not available in the charge sheet that actually what transpired on the particular date of incident and how many persons were present in the house. All those things to be thrashed out during the course of full dressed trial.
4. In the above facts and circumstances of the case, proviso to Section 432 Cr.P.C. would come to the help of the petitioner herein. Even at this stage, if the court comes to the conclusion that, a strong prima facie case is made out against a woman, still the court can exercise its discretion and it may enlarge a lady on bail with conditions. Though the petition is filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., the proviso to Section 437 can be equally made use of. The said proviso says that, even if there appears reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is guilty of the offences punishable with death or imprisonment for life, provided the Court may direct that the person referred to in Clause (i) or Clause (ii), be released on bail, if such person is under the age of sixteen years or is a woman or is sick or infirm. Therefore, in the above circumstances, in my opinion, as the petitioner/accused has been in jail since 5-01-2019 and the charge sheet has already been filed, she is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the trial, with certain condition………” (Emphasis supplied).
Long before the said judgment, the very learned Judge in RATNAWWA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF KARNATAKA – Crl.P.No.100503 of 2014 decided on 13-03-2014, has held as follows:
“2.The petitioners, who are arrayed as accused Nos. 2 and 3 in Crime No.117 of 2013 of Kundgol Police have approached the Sessions Court, Hubli, for grant of bail, after filing of the charge sheet, which came to be rejected. Hence, petitioners are before this Court for grant of bail.
3. The brief factual aspects that emanate from records are that, a person by name Parameshappa Basappa Naikar has lodged a complaint stating that, on 6.10.2013 at about 5.30 p.m. he has received a telephonic message from his son-in-law by name Manjappa Ningappa Balanaikar of Betadur Village that the accused persons – petitioners and one Dyamanna have assaulted the deceased Basappa Shivappa Balanaikar with a spade. Immediately complainant went to the spot and saw the dead body and from one Ningappa Shivappa Balanaikar he came to know that Dyamanna has assaulted on the head of deceased with a spade. It is alleged that petitioners Ratnawwa and Neelawwa have instigated said Dyamanna to assault the deceased, who has succumbed to injuries on the spot. The Police have investigated the matter and even during the course of investigation the eye-witnesses have reiterated same set of facts. CW-8 Ningappa Shivappa Balanaikar, an eye-witness to the incident has stated that the petitioners were present at the time of incident and they have instigated or abetted Dyamanna to commit suit an offence. Looking to the above factual aspects, no overt act has been alleged against these petitioners. The learned Sessions Judge after considering the materials has observed that the petitioners are root cause for the incident and rejected the bail petition filed by petitioners. Police have filed charge sheet against the petitioners. Petitioners were arrested on 7-10-2013 and since then they are in judicial custody.
4. The proviso in Section 437 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’ for brevity) empowers the Court that even if the offences which are punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for seven years or more, the Court may direct that such a person referred to in clause – (i) or (ii) of Section 437 of Cr.P.C. be released on bail, if it is satisfied that if such person is under the age of 16 years or is a woman or is sick or infirm. Therefore, it is a special proviso appended to Section 437 of Cr.P.C. particularly, considering the woman folk, sick and infirm persons and the persons, who are less than 16 years. When specific over acts are not there, the abetment has to be proved before the Court beyond all reasonable doubt and further that only on the basis of such abetment the other accused has committed such a ghastly incident. Hence, it is not necessary to keep the petitioners in jail. …..” (Emphasis supplied).
In a later judgment, another coordinate Bench of this Court in THIPPAMMA @ THIPPAKKA v. STATE OF KARNATAKA – Crl.P.No.8575 of 2017 decided on 01-03-2018, has held has follows:
“2. Respondent-Police has registered a complaint against the petitioner and another accused for the offences under Section 302 and 201 r/w 34 of IPC in Crime No.225 of 2016. The complaint was made by the son of the deceased. It appears that there was illicit relationship between accused Nos. 1 and 2 and the deceased came to know of this. It is alleged that in the background of illicit relationship, on 10-11-2016 in between 11.00 p.m. and 1.30 p.m. accused Nos. 1 and 2 caused death of Thippeswamy.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argues that there are no eye-witnesses to the incident. The prosecution has to prove the circumstances. Investigation has been completed and charge sheet is filed and other accused is released on bail. This petitioner is a woman and therefore, requires to be released on bail.
4. The HCGP opposes the grant of bail stating that there are prima facie materials although the entire case rests on circumstantial evidence.
5. Having perused the complaint and other materials, it can be said that since other accused has been released on bail, this petitioner being woman can also be released on bail. That apart, this case rests on circumstantial evidence. Burden is on the prosecution to prove every link in the chain of circumstances. Since charge sheet has been filed and that the petitioner has been in custody for quite a long time, she can be admitted to bail…….” (Emphasis supplied).
All the afore-quoted judgments rendered by the coordinate Benches of this Court, were considering the purport of Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. and were cases where accused No.1 therein were women and all of them alleged of offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC for commission of murder. It is also a matter of record that the alleged accomplice in the act of murder one Vijay Kumar is granted bail on 13-04-2022 by the learned Sessions Judge. For the aforesaid facts, the statute i.e., Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. and its application in the judgments of three coordinate Benches all would enure to the benefit of the petitioner to be enlarged on bail notwithstanding the fact that the offence alleged is under Section 302 of the IPC. It is not the law that bail should always be denied in a case where the offence punishable is of death or life imprisonment. In exceptional cases, if the statute permits and the facts not being so gory and grave criminal antecedents shrouding the culprit, the consideration in such cases would be different.”
Finally and far most significantly, the Bench then holds in para 9 that, “In my considered view, the facts in the case at hand are not those that would not entitle consideration of the case under Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. particularly, looking at the conduct of the petitioner for having surrendered before the Police on commission of the alleged murder. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents except the present sword hanging on the head, and on release would not be a threat to society, coupled with the fact that the police have completed the investigation and have filed the charge sheet at the case on hand. Wherefore, the following:
The criminal petition is allowed. The petitioner/accused No.1 Nethra shall be released on bail in connection with Crime No.530 of 2021 of Madanayakanahalli Police Station and pending before the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) and JMFC Court, Nelamangala, Bangalore Rural District subject to the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.”
(ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the jurisdictional Court on all future hearing dates unless exempted by the Court for any genuine cause.
(iv) The petitioner shall not leave the jurisdiction of the trial Court without prior permission of the Court till the case registered against her is disposed of.
The observations made above are only for the purpose of consideration of the application for bail and the same shall not in any manner influence the trial. The trial Court shall consider the case on its merits and without being influenced by this order.”
In sum, it must be underscored that Justice M Nagaprasanna of Karnataka High Court has in this learned, laudable and landmark judgment made it crystal clear that women can definitely be granted bail even in non-bailable offences and even if it is punishable with life sentence/death. But the Court has simultaneously also made it indubitably clear that before granting bail, the Court must definitely take into account the conduct of the petitioner, her past track record, whether she poses a real threat to society if released on bail and all other necessary factors as stated herein aforesaid! It definitely merits no reiteration that all the Courts in similar such cases must always unfailingly and unflinchingly abide by what the Karnataka High Court has laid down so very commendably in this leading case!
S. 389 CRPC: ‘Application for suspension of sentence should be considered liberally if punishment is less than 10 years’
It is really most heartening to see that in an extremely commendable, cogent, concise composed and courageous judgment titled Ghulam Mustafa & Anr V/s UT of J&K&L in Crl A(S) No. 48/2019 CrlM Nos. 2432 & 1080/2021 CrlM Nos. 391 & 445/2022 that was reserved on May 17 and then finally pronounced on May 19, 2022, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has most rightly, robustly and rationally reiterated that as per the provision under Section 389 of CrPC, if the convict is punished with imprisonment for a term less than ten years, no notice is required to the Public Prosecutor/State regarding the application filed by the accused for suspension of his sentence and release on bail. This clearly implies that the Court wants that the application for suspension of sentence should be considered liberally if punishment is less than 10 years. The Court was hearing a criminal appeal under Section 374 of CrPC which was directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence where the appellant were found guilty of offence under Section 307, 451, 34 of the Ranbir Penal Code and sentenced to go for rigorous imprisonment for ten years with a fine of Rs 10,000.
CRLM NOS. 391 & 445 OF 2022
To start with, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by a single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice Mohan Lal of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court sets the pitch in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “Instant criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C is directed against judgment of conviction dated 30.10.2019 and order of sentence dated 30.10.2019 rendered by the Court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu in file No. 33/Sessions titled “State v/s Ghulam Mustafa & Anr.” where under appellants/convicts have been found guilty of commission of offences u/s 307, 451, 34 RPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for (10) years and also fine in the sum of Rs.10,000/.”
Needless to say, the Bench then aptly mentions in para 2 that, “Feeling aggrieved of the impugned judgment of conviction, appellants/convicts have assailed it’s correctness, propriety and legality on the grounds, that as a result of miss-appreciation of facts and misapplication of law so far as the finding of the trial court relating to holding appellants guilty of having committing of offences under Sections 307, 451, 34 RPC and convicting them of the same is bad in the eyes of law, therefore, prayed that the present appeal be allowed the judgment of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu be set aside.”
To put things in perspective, the Bench then enunciates in para 3 that, “Alongwith the appeal, appellants/convicts have filed applications for suspension of conviction and sentence pending the hearing of appeal, with further prayer for ordering them release on bail primarily on the ground that there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future, and in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court wherein it has been held that when a convicted person is sentenced to a fixed period of sentence, on filing of appeal, suspension of sentence should be considered liberally unless there are exceptional circumstances; that the bail applications of both the appellants/convicts filed earlier were rejected vide order dated 02.07.2020 of this Court and to obviate the apprehension of the appellants of there being no likelihood of hearing of the appeal in near future and this Court directed the matter to be listed for hearing on 18.08.2020, thereafter the matter was listed more than 10 times but the arguments in the appeal could not be considered which further constrained the appellant/convict No.2 to file another application for grant of bail bearing CrlM No. 1612/2020, which was further rejected by this Court vide order dated 03.09.2021 on the ground that the appellant No.2 has not even undergone a substantial period of sentence and therefore, it was not a stage for showing indulgence of this Court; that the appellant/convict No.2 is suffering from kidney related ailments and is having only one kidney and the other one stands removed even before the conviction.”
As it turned out, the Bench then observes in para 4 that, “Respondent has filed objections wherein it has been stated that both the appellants/convicts are the main accused in case FIR No. 14/2005 for commission of offences U/S 307, 326, 451, 34 RPC registered at Police Station Gharota, Jammu; that it has been established by the court below that appellants/accused persons have been convicted after full trial and the entire testimonies of the witnesses would narrate as how brutally and with scant regard and fear of the convicts has chopped the arm of the victim; that the appellants deserve no lenience and there are cogent reasons and chances that they would escape the clutches of law as they have come to know that they cannot be absolved of the crime, thus there is every eventuality of the fleeing away justice; that no case of suspension of sentence is made out as the offences for which the accused persons/appellants are charged is of heinous nature and these offences definitely constitute a class apart and need to be viewed with a different approach in the matter of bail; that the case of the appellants are also not covered under the Supreme Court judgments as they have not been in the prison for half of their sentence, therefore, the application be dismissed.”
Most significantly, the Bench after hearing the learned counsels from all sides then while citing relevant provisions and relevant case laws expounds in para 7 that, “Heard & considered. Section 389 of Code of Criminal Procedure deals with the provisions of suspension of sentence pending the appeal. For the sake of convenience Sec. 389 Cr.PC is reproduced hereunder:-
389. Suspension of sentence pending the appeal; release of appellant on bail.—(1) Pending any appeal by a convicted person, the Appellate Court may, for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, order that the execution of the sentence or order appealed against be suspended and, also, if he is in confinement, that he be released on bail, or on his own bond:
[Provided that the Appellate Court shall, before releasing on bail or on his own bond a convicted person who is convicted of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years, shall give opportunity to the Public Prosecutor for showing cause in writing against such release:
Provided further that in cases where a convicted person is released on bail it shall be open to the Public Prosecutor to file an application for the cancellation of the bail.]
(2) The power conferred by this section on an Appellate Court may be exercised also by the High Court in the case of an appeal by a convicted person to a Court subordinate thereto.
(3) Where the convicted person satisfies the Court by which he is convicted that he intends to present an appeal, the Court shall,-
(i) where such person, being on bail, is sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or
(ii) where the offence of which such person has been convicted is a bailable one, and he is on bail, order that the convicted person be released on bail, unless there are special reasons for refusing bail, for such period as will afford sufficient time to present the appeal and obtain the orders of Appellate Court under Sub-Section(1); and the sentence of imprisonment shall, so long as he is so released on bail, be deemed to be suspended.
(4) When the appellant is ultimately sentenced to imprisonment for a term or to imprisonment for life, the time during which he is so released shall be excluded in computing the term for which he is so sentenced.
Cursory glance of Section 389 Cr.PC makes the legal proposition abundantly clear, that pending an appeal preferred by a convicted person notice shall only be issued to the Public Prosecutor/State in case the convict is punished for offences punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term not less than ten (10) years, which clearly connote that if the convict is punished with imprisonment for a term less than 10 years no notice is required to be given to the Public Prosecutor/State in regard to the application filed by the convict/accused for suspension of his sentence and his release on bail.
In the case of BHAGWAN RAMA SHINDE GOSAI AND OTHERS Versus STATE OF GUJARAT [(1999) 4 Supreme Court Cases 421], Hon’ble Supreme Court while discussing the power and scope of section 389 Cr.PC regarding suspension of sentence pending the appeal filed by the convict, and while holding that the prayer for suspension of sentence should be considered liberally unless there is any statutory restriction, and while suspending the sentence and directing appellant/accused/convict to be released on bail found guilty for commission of offences u/ss 392 r/w 397 IPC for rigorous imprisonment of 10 years by the trail court, in paras 3&4 of the judgment held as under:-
3. When a convicted person is sentenced to fixed period of sentence and when he files appeals under any statutory right, suspension of sentence can be considered by the appellate court liberally unless there are exceptional circumstances. Of course if there is any statutory restriction against suspension of sentence it is a different matter. Similarly, when the sentence is life imprisonment the consideration for suspension of sentence could be of a different approach. But if for any reason the sentence of limited duration cannot be suspended every endeavour should be made to dispose of the appeal on merits more so when motion for expeditious hearing the appeal is made in such cases. Otherwise the very valuable right of appeal would be an exercise in futility by efflux of time. When the appellate court finds that due to practical reasons such appeals cannot be disposed of expeditiously the appellate court must bestow special concern in the matter of suspending the sentence. So as to make the appeal right meaningful and effective. Of course appellate courts can impose similar conditions when bail is granted.
4. In this case as the High Court was not inclined to hear the appeal expeditiously we are of the view that the sentence passed on appellants can be suspended on some stringent conditions. We, therefore, suspend the sentence and direct the appellants to be released on bail on each of them executing a bond to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge, Nadiad. We direct the appellants to report to Kapadwang Police Station on all Mondays and Thursdays between 4.00p.m. and 6.00 p.m. until disposal of the appeal pending before the High Court.
Ratio of the judgment (Supra) makes it manifest, that Section 389 Cr.PC does not contain any “statutory restriction” in suspension of sentence and granting of bail to the accused/convict and the prayer should be considered liberally and the Appellate Court may impose restrictions considering the gravity of offence.
Similarly, in the case of Vajida Bano and Ors V/s State Through Advocate General, this Court while relying upon the judgment of BHAGWAN RAMA SHINDE GOSAI’S (Supra) suspended the sentence of appellant/convicts, convicted and sentenced in FIR 09/2014 for commission of offences u/ss 363/317/ 302/ 120-B & 201 RPC of P/S Kargil.
In the case of State of Haryana Vs Hasmat (decided by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 26th July 2004 in Appeal Crl. 715-717 of 2004), relied by Ld. Counsel for respondent/victim, Hon’ble Supreme Court set aside the order of Punjab & Haryana High Court regarding the suspension of sentence and enlargement of accused/convict on bail convicted for commission of offences u/ss 148/302/307/324 r/w Sec. 149 of IPC r/w 25/27 Arms Act on the ground of seriousness of offence wherein the relevant facts like the “nature of acquisition” the manner in which crime was committed, “the gravity of offence” and the desirability of releasing the accused on bail after they were convicted for committing serious offence of murder, and the said aspects were not considered by the High Court which passing the impugned order of suspension/bail.
In the case of Bholu Vs State of U.P. (Crl. Misc. Application No. 124973 of 2017) decided by Allahabad High Court on 04-05-2018 relied by Ld. Counsel for respondent/victim, Hon’ble Allahabad High Court rejected the 1st and 2nd bail applications of accused/appellant/convict even though he was in jail for 9 years on the ground that the appellant/convict was convicted for heinous offence of 2 murders.
In another case relied by Ld. Counsel for respondent titled Mahesh Pahade Versus State of Madhya Pradesh) [Criminal Appeal No. 933/2014 decided on 18th July 2018] the Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court relaying upon the plethora of decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court viz; 1. (2018) 3 SCC 187 (Lachhman Dass vs. Resham Chand Kaler and Another); 2. (2016) 6 SCC 699 (Amanullah and Another vs. State of Bihar and others); 3. (2009) 6 SCC 767 (National Human Rights Commission vs. State of Gujarat and others); 4. (2006) 3 SCC 374 (Zahira Habibullah Sheikh and another vs. State of Gujarat and others); 5. (2001) 6 SCC 338 (Puran etc. vs. Rambilas and another etc.); 6. (2000) 2 SCC 391 (R. Rathinam vs. State by DSP); 7. (1980) 3 SCC 141 (P.S.R. Sadhanantham vs. Arunachalam and another); 8. (1979) 4 SCC 719 (Rattan Singh vs. State of Punjab), held, that the victims of heinous crime cannot be denied the right to address their grievances before the court of law. In the decision (Supra) Hon’ble 8 CrlM Nos. 391 & 44 Madhya Pradesh High Court held, that Section 372 of Code of Criminal Procedure gives right to victim to file an appeal against order of conviction which clearly gives right to the prosecutrix a victim of heinous crime on her person to approach the court for cancellation of bail. The case laws relied upon by Ld. Counsel for respondent/victim only lay down an invariable principle of law that in cases punished with imprisonment of less than ten (10) years even no notice is required to be given to the State/Public Prosecutor, however, in heinous offences like that of murders u/s 302 IPC, the court has the power/jurisdiction to grant or refuse the suspension of sentence and bail. In the case in hand, appellants/convicts have been found guilty by the trial court of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge Jammu for commission of offence u/s 307, 451, 34 RPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for (10) years and also fine in the sum of Rs.10,000. Vide ratio of the judgment of Bhagwan Ram Shinde Gosai’s and others case (1999) 4 Supreme Court Cases 421 (Supra), relied by Ld. Counsels for appellants/convicts, there is no statutory restriction/prohibition in not considering the application for suspension and releasing of appellants/convicts on bail. Appellant/convict No.1 is resident of Sagar Nallah Graint Ranjan, Tehsil Jammu while appellant/convict No.2 is resident of Bye Dhara Gursai, Tehsil Mendhar and both them have deep roots in the society and do not possess the golden wings to flee from justice, as nothing substantial has been brought before the notice of this court that appellants/convicts have absconded during trial. The seriousness or gravity of offence is to be seen in cases where accused/convict is punished with death penalty, life imprisonment or imprisonment of 10 years and above, wherein, while considering the application for suspension and bail the judicial description lies in the wisdom of the court. Right to life and liberty of an individual is precious under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and is also a very valuable right of accused/convict which also continues during the appeal period as appeal is the continuation of the trial.”
While batting for suspension of sentence, the Bench then hastened to add in para 8 that, “Keeping in view the facts that the applicants/appellants are in custody for the last more than two and half years of the total sentence imposed and applicant/appellant No.2 is suffering from kidney related ailment and there is no immediate prospect of the main appeal being heard in near future, a fit and proper case for suspension of sentence is made out.”
As a corollary, the Bench then stipulates and directs in para 9 that, “As a sequel to the aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that applicants/appellants have made out a strong case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail in their favour. I, therefore, suspend the sentence inflicted upon the applicants/appellants and direct them to be released on bail by executing surety bonds in the sum of Rs.50000/- each to the satisfaction of Registrar Judicial of this court with the direction to furnish personal recognizance of like amount before Superintendent Central Jail Kot Bhalwal Jammu where the applicants/appellants are presently serving the sentence term in judicial lockup. It is further ordered, that the applicants/appellants shall appear before this court on each and every date of hearing except for the reasons beyond his control and unless exempted.”
What’s more, the Bench then observes in para 10 that, “Applications are disposed of.”
Finally, the Bench then concludes by holding in para 11 that, “List the main appeal for final hearing on 29.07.2022.”
All told, the sum and substance of this extremely learned, laudable and landmark judgment by Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court is that application for suspension of sentence should be considered liberally if the punishment awarded is less than 10 years and the case is genuine and needy as we see in this leading case also! Of course, all courts must definitely abide by what has been laid by the J&K&L High Court in this learned judgment and consider similar such cases compassionately! There can certainly be just no denying or disputing it whatsoever!
Just One Psychiatrist For All Prisoners With Mental Illness In State Not Sustainable: Orissa HC Expresses Concern On Prison Conditions
It cannot be easily glossed over that none other than the Orissa High Court itself in an extremely laudable, learned, landmark and latest judgment titled Krushna Prasad Sahoo v. State of Orissa & Ors. in W.P.(C) No. 6610 of 2006 pronounced as recently as on May 21, 2022 has expressed deep concerns on the issue of the mental health of prisoners. On learning that there existed only one psychiatrist to attend all prisoners in the state with mental illness, a Division Bench of Chief Justice S Muralidhar and Justice RK Pattanaik noted with concern that, “This situation is unsustainable considering that it is physically impossible for just one psychiatrist to attend all prisoners in the state with mental illness.” It merits mentioning that the development comes in an ongoing case in which the Orissa High Court had previously directed the Director-General, Prisons, to ensure food, hygiene, and health facilities in all the jails/sub-jails of the State.
ATHAMALIK SUB-JAIL MATTER
To start with, this brief, brilliant, bold and balanced judgment authored by a Bench of Orissa High Court comprising of Chief Justice Dr S Muralidhar and Justice RK Pattanaik sets the pitch in motion by first and foremost putting forth in para 1 that, “Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court on 5th May 2022, the District and Sessions Judge, Angul has submitted a report dated 18th May, 2022 enclosing original statements of 12 inmates and 2 staff of the Athamalik Sub-Jail. The sealed cover containing the report was opened and the report has been perused by the Court. Copies of the report be made available to Mr. Debakanata Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate (AGA) and Mr. Gautam Misra, learned Amicus Curiae (AC).”
In the fitness of things, the Bench then points out in para 2 that, “Mr. Manoj Chhabra, DG, Prisons, Odisha, who is present in virtual mode, states that he will immediately act on the said report by taking an appropriate action against the person involved in the incident of the assault on a convict as mentioned in that report. After copies of the report have been provided to them, the said report will again be placed in the sealed cover and kept with Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.”
To be sure, the Bench then discloses in para 3 that, “Affidavits dated 20th May, 2022 have been filed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons and the Member Secretary, Odisha State Legal Services Authority (OSLSA) regarding status of compliance with the earlier directions issued by this Court. The learned AC has also prepared a detailed convenience note for consideration of this Court.”
While according top priority to overcrowding of prisons, the Bench then mentions in para 4 that, “At today’s hearing, the Court first considered the issue of overcrowding of prisons. The note of the AC, refers to two SubJails, viz., the Balliguda Sub-Jail and the Jajpur Sub-Jail, where even now the prison population is more than 100% of the carrying capacity of the said Sub-Jails. Mr. Chhabra, the DG, Prisons is conscious of this position and has offered a temporary solution of shifting the prisoners to neighbouring jails. He has also undertaken to re-examine the earlier suggestion whether pending the actual increase in the additional capacity of the jails and sub-jails, there can be a temporary solution found for accommodating prisoners in other state-owned buildings.”
To put things in perspective, the Bench then envisages in para 5 that, “In the course of the discussion, a concern was raised about the resistance faced when applications are filed before the concerned Courts for shifting of an inmate from one Jail to another. Considering that the problem of overcrowding of jails in Odisha is a real and serious one, and it is going to take some time before the additional capacity in jails can be constructed, if a request is made for shifting of an inmate from a jail to a jail in a neighbouring district at the nearest possible location then such request should be considered in its proper perspective keeping in view the serious problems faced by inmates in an overcrowded Jail. It is emphasized that this is only a temporary solution pending the creation of the additional capacity in the Jails.”
Quite revealingly, the Bench then notes in para 6 that, “Apart from the above two sub-jails, there are four jails viz., the Phulbani District Jail, Bhadrak Special Sub-Jail, Kamakhyanagar Sub-Jail and the Malkanagiri Sub-Jail, where the prison population between 50 to 100% in excess of the carrying capacity of those jails even as of today. That apart, fifteen District Jails, Special Jails and Sub-Jails face the situation of prison population being in excess to the extent of 20 to 50%. Mr. Chhabra assures the Court that each of these situations is receiving the highest attention of the prison authorities and wherever possible, applications will be filed before the concerned Courts for shifting of the excess population to the nearest possible jails to tide over the critical situation.”
PRISONERS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS
No doubt, the Bench then specifies in para 7 that, “The issue of prisoners with mental illness was highlighted during today’s hearing. As per the figures collated by the Secretary, Odisha State Legal Services Authority (OSLSA), from the reports of visit undertaken by the District Magistrates (DMs) there are at least 286 prisoners with mental illnesses in the various jails and sub-jails. Mr. Chhabra anticipates that this number may be even higher and would be in the range of around 500 prisoners.”
Alarmingly, the Bench then notes in para 8 that, “The statistics provided to this Court show that there are as many as 42 prisoners in Circle Jail, Koraput, 33 in Circle Jail, Sambalpur, 29 in District Jail, Keonjhar, 22 in District Jail, Bhawanipatna, 19 in Special Sub-Jail, Bonaigarh, 14 in District Jail, Angul, 14 in Sub-Jail, Nayagada and 15 in Special Jail, Rourkela, who have been diagnosed with mental illnesses that require urgent attention. It is a matter of deep concern, and a concern that is shared by Mr. Chhabra, that there is just one psychiatrist in Choudwar Circle Jail, who is expected to cater to the needs of all prisoners with mental illnesses throughout the State. This situation is clearly unsustainable considering that it is physically impossible for just one psychiatrist to attend to all prisoners with mental illnesses.”
Commendably, the Bench then lays bare in para 9 that, “A suggestion that has come forth from the learned AC and which the Court is willing to accept is to have the OSLSA to step in to arrange for visits by psychiatrists to each of the jails where there are prisoners with mental illnesses to have an assessment done of their present condition and what urgent measures need to be taken to alleviate their distress. The Member Secretary, OSLSA, who is present in virtual mode, has undertaken to arrange for such visit by specialist psychiatrist not just from Public Health Facilities but even from Private Health Facilities, the expenses for which will be defrayed by OSLSA. The OSLSA will then follow up on such reports of individual assessment by filing appropriate applications before the concerned Courts on behalf of the prisoners enclosing such assessments and praying for appropriate orders from the Court concerned, particularly for interim or regular bail. Each such prisoner with mental illness will be assigned with an individual lawyer from the panel of the OSLSA.”
PRISONERS’ PANCHAYAT COUNCIL
Essentially, the Bench then stipulates in para 10 that, “The Court’s attention was drawn to Rule 802 of the Odisha Model Jail Manual, 2020 (2020 Manual), which provides for constitution of Prisoners’ Panchayat Council (PPC). Mr. Chhabra has undertaken to examine the position of the constitution of such PPC in the jails since that would address a large number of problems faced by inmates within jails, which can be then brought to the notice of the jail administration for remedial action. The Court emphasises that since this is a statutory requirement, it has to be complied both in letter and spirit and on the next date of hearing, the Court will be informed of the constitution of such PPCs in every circle jail, district jail, special jail, special sub-jail or sub-jail as mandated under Rule 802 of 2020 Manual.”
PRISON DEVELOPMENT BOARD
As we see, the Bench then lays down in para 11 that, “As regards the Prison Development Board (PDB), Mr. Chhabra informs the Court that in view of the draft agenda proposed by his predecessor having to be revised, a meeting has not yet been held. However, he expects it will happen very soon and definitely before the end of June, 2022. The Court expects the PDB to take up in its agenda the issue of the budgetary allocations per prisoner, which requires revision among the other issues including infrastructure, overcrowding, medical facilities, skill development of the prison inmates and the like. The deliberations of the meeting of the PDB be placed before the Court on the next date.”
INFORMATION ABOUT PRISONERS’ CASES
As things stand, the Bench then maintains in para 12 that, “On the issue of information being provided to prisoners about their cases, Mr. Chhabra states that during his visit to the Circle Jail, Choudwar and District Jails in Angul and Puri, he did notice such e-kiosk and his information is that there are around 20 jails in Odisha that have such e-kiosks. He states that he will be visiting the jails in other States to ascertain the best practice in this area and ensure that those are made available in the jails in Odisha. Basically, a prisoner must have easy and ready access to latest updated information regarding his own case as well as orders of the concerned Court in his case.”
VACANT POSTS OF MEDICAL STAFF
On key issue of vacant posts of medical staff, the Bench then directs in para 13 that, “On the issue of vacant post of Medical Staff, the position of 3 psychiatrists is still lying vacant and 31 sanctioned posts of Medical Officers are also still vacant. It is stated that since the D.G. of Prisons has made a request to the State Government in this regard, a direction is issued to the Home Department as well as the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Odisha to immediately act upon the above requests of the D.G., Prisons and expedite the process of filling up of the vacant posts of Medical Officers and Psychiatrists.”
Adding more to it, the Bench then also directs in para 14 that, “Mr. Chhabra states that although directions have been issued by the Health Department and Home Department for increasing the frequency of the visits by the Medical personnel to the jails, that is not happening as was directed. This aspect must be immediately examined by both the Health and Family Welfare Department and the Home Department to ensure that the instructions are strictly carried out. The responsibility should be fixed on the concerned Chief District Medical Officer (CDMO) in each of the districts in this regard. A further circular/order be issued to that effect forthwith.”
Segregation of UTPs from convicted inmates, Segregation of Young Offenders from Adults and Separate Enclosures for Women Prisoners
Quite worryingly, the Bench then enunciates in para 15 that, “A concern has been expressed that at least in six sub-jails in Champua, Kamakshyanagar, Banki, Jajpur, Dharamagarh and Jeypore, under trials were not segregated from convicted inmates. Further, young offenders in the age group of 18 to 21 are not separated from adults in jails of several districts including Bargarh, Malkanagiri, Keonjhar, Bhadrak, Cuttack, Jajpur, Kalahandi, Koraput and Nuapada. A third aspect here is that the reports collated by the Member Secretary, OSLSA reveal that there are no separate enclosures for women prisoners in the District Jail in Bhawanipatna and even the report from the visit of the DLSA to Jharsuguda reveals that the women’s ward is in a pathetic condition. As regards the jail in Jharsuguda is concerned, Mr. Chhabra states that the Additional I.G. has visited the said jail and corrective measures have already been taken. As regards the issue regarding segregation in the jail in Bhawanipatna, he states that steps will immediately be taken to rectify the situation and that he will be issuing instructions in that regard.”
BIJU PATNAIK OPEN AIR PRISON
Be it noted, the Bench then states in para 16 that, “This Court had in its order dated 23rd December 2021, pointed out that the Biju Patnaik Open Air Prison, which has a capacity of 125, has remained largely underutilized. The position as of 30th April, 2022 is that the said prison has only 33 prisoners. Mr. Chhabra stated that once the COVID-19 situation totally eases and convicts return to the jails, the prison population in the open-air prison would increase. The Court urges that this issue receive the highest and most urgent attention of the prison department and on the next date, the Court must be informed of a substantial increase in the prisoner population in the open air prison.”
It is worth noting that the Bench then recalls and puts forth in para 17 that, “This Court had issued detailed directions regarding the duty lawyers being to be attached to every Police Station and of the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273, having to be followed in letter and spirit. The Court is informed by Mr. Biswajit Mohanty, Secretary, OSLSA that in 418 Police Stations in Odisha, the Duty-Lawyer system has already been implemented. The names and the mobile numbers of the Duty-Lawyers are stated to be displayed on boards in a prominent place in each of these Police Stations. He expects the Duty-Lawyer system to be implemented in all the remaining Police Stations by the 10th June, 2022. The Duty-Lawyers will be given an orientation through the DLSAs, emphasizing the need to ensure compliance with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra). The orientation will also be for effective interaction with the persons brought into Police Stations and proper advice as to their options.”
Needless to say, the Bench then mentions in para 18 that, “Mr. Chhabra states that the efforts would be made to earmark some space in every jail and sub-jail for library books and reading materials to be kept for prisoners.”
Of course, the Bench then reiterated in para 19 that, “The learned AC points out that despite the directions issued by this Court in its order dated 23rd December, 2021 in Para-48 about the Police authorities having to strictly comply with the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. AIR 1994 SC 1349 and the subsequent amendments by which Sections 41-A to 41-D were introduced in the Cr.P.C., those provisions are not yet being strictly implemented. The direction to the Police to publish every month on its website the relevant information of persons arrested is reiterated.”
Quite remarkably, the Bench then mandates in para 20 that, “In modification of the direction issued by this Court in Para-7 of its Order dated 23rd December 2021, it is directed that the Member Secretary, OSLSA will facilitate the release of prisoners, who were unable to be released on bail despite being granted bail on account of their inability to furnish bail bonds, by filing applications before the Court of Sessions or the High Court under Section 440 (2) of the Cr.P.C. for modifying the conditions and the terms of both the Judgments of the Supreme Court as well as the guidelines issued by the NALSA in this regard.”
Most commendably, the Bench then notes in para 21 that, “A suggestion has been received from the D.G. Prisons to the DLSAs, who organize the visits by Panel Counsel or themselves visit the prisons should compile a list of Under Trial Prisoners (UTPs), who may be informed sick or aged or in need of urgent medical attention including pregnant women and on that basis, advise moving the Court for bail on medical grounds. This suggestion will also be acted upon by the Secretary, OSLSA, who will instruct the DLSAs accordingly.”
What’s more, the Bench then adds in para 22 that, “The Court also notes its satisfaction on the various measures that have been taken in the jails in Odisha pursuant to the orders passed by this Court, which has resulted in a considerable improvement in the conditions in he prisons in Odisha, as is reflected in the reports submitted to the Court by the District Magistrates, the DLSAs and even the District Judges, who have undertaken visits, all of which has been collated and presented in this Court at today’s hearing. Nevertheless, much more needs to be done. Hopefully, the further directions issued by this Court today should help in that direction.”
Finally, the Bench then concludes by holding in para 23 that, “List on 28th July, 2022 at 2 pm.”
In sum, we thus see that the Orissa High Court has taken great pains to ensure that prisoners are properly looked after in prisons. The Court minced no words to express its serious concern on the deplorable condition of prisoners in jail. It also made it indisputably clear that just one psychiatrist for all prisoners with mental illnesses in State is not sustainable. No denying it!
My brush with the PMO: Part 2
As I mention in my book, “Not Just A Civil Servant”, the real coal story wasn’t about the successful coal block auctions. It was about the record increase in coal production. In 2014, there were on an average more than 25 power plants that were declared critical daily for want of coal. This changed dramatically in subsequent years as the coal production rose by 33 million tonnes (which was more than the cumulative increase during the past 4 years) during 2014-15 and further by 44 million tonnes during 2015-16. By 2016, there was not a single power plat critical on account of shortage of coal. We were even toying with the idea of exporting coal to Bangladesh. This increase in production created another set of problems.
There were a select few “privileged” power producers who now wanted to make a “fast buck”. These generating companies had bid for tariff and they were supposed to make arrangement for coal themselves. Coal India Limited (CIL) was obliged to supply coal at the notified price (a price below the market price as this was adjusted in the tariff. The benefit of lower price was not retained by the generation company but passed on to the state-owned distribution companies) only to such power generating companies with whom they had prior agreement. There was no obligation to supply coal at notified price to these “privileged” few. These “privileged” power producers had succeeded in getting a special dispensation for themselves during the UPA regime when there was acute shortage of coal. Ironically the Comptroller and Accountant General who had gone to town with the irregularities relating to coal block auctions chose to remain silent on an equally scandalous dispensation being given to sect set of industrialists.
By 2016 coal production had increased substantially. In almost every meeting convened by the PMO whether relating to coal or otherwise, I was asked why was I not giving linkages to these “privileged” industrialists. Ultimately, I sent a note to the Principal Secretary raising following issues:
Should CIL coal be supplied at notified price to such entities?
Would not the benefits of concessionally priced domestic coal lead to undue gains for them as the Power Purchase Agreements were not signed on the basis of assurance/commitment of notified price coal?
Wouldn’t allotment of linkages to these tantamount to grant of undue favour or preferential treatment when there is no legal or contractual obligation to supply notified price coal to these plants?
Would this not amount to favour to the successful bidders (in PPA bidding) as bid conditions would be changed after the bidding process?
Would not assignment of linkages to such entities that did not bid in coal block auctions or did not win a coal block after bidding amount to gross disfavour to those that participated and won coal blocks in auction?
In subsequent meeting at the PMO when the issue came up for discussion yet again and I referred to the note that I had sent, I was given a dressing down that the PMO doesn’t take decisions. How true it was! Yes, we were told very clearly that PMO should not be mentioned in any decision that is taken by the Ministry/Department. Lessons were learnt from the mistakes of the previous government.
However, I stuck to my guns. And, I was moved from dark dungeons of coal mines to the bright lights of school education. Or, so I thought.
My visits to the PMO became few and far between as it was evident that school education was not high on the priority of the Government. The budgetary allocation for school education had kept coming down since 2014-15. It was Rs 55,115 crore for that year and as a percentage of GDP it was 0.52. For the year 2016-17, it came down to Rs 43,554 crore (0.36% of GDP). In one of the rare school education meetings at the PMO when I brought this to the notice of the participants, normally unflappable Mr P K Mishra got very annoyed. He appeared to be convinced that I was not providing the correct figures. There were indeed many occasions when those at the PMO were not prepared to face facts. I wondered how would they then convey facts to the PM.
It happened just three months before superannuation. There were a couple of paper leaks in the examination being conducted by the Central Board od Secondary Education (CBSE). The media was baying for Anita Karwal’s blood. She was Chairperson, CBSE. As she had chosen to set things in order in CBSE, a set of mafias were after her. (The entire story is narrated in “Not Just a Civil Servant”). After ascertaining the details, I was convinced that neither she nor the CBSE was to be faulted. It took some effort to convince the Minister who initially wanted to shift Anita to “diffuse” the crisis. Despite being convinced subsequently, he still wanted to take the PMO into confidence (A culture that had evolved over a period of time). Mr Nripendra Mishra was always available for guidance and this day was no different. Despite the short notice, he gave us time. A meeting was held at the PMO on 30th March. Mr Mishra backed my stand and asked me to go ahead to brief the media later in the afternoon but only after I had received the PM’s clearance through the PMO. I also suggested announcement of the future course of action with regard to the two papers that had leaked. This too was agreed upon. We now had something concrete to tell the media. The economics exam of class 12 was to be re-conducted and the decision on Mathematics paper for class 10 was to be taken subsequently on the basis of an enquiry into the extent and impact of leakage. The logic was simple. The class 10 exam was like an internal exam with virtually no implication on future admissions. Class 12 had much greater implications. (Subsequently, post enquiry, it was discovered that the class 10 paper leak was neither widespread nor did it have any impact on the outcome. Hence, no re-examination was done in this case and around 16 lakh children were saved from the trouble of having to appear again).
The press conference was originally scheduled at 5 pm on 30th March. The entire media was waiting for me but I was eagerly awaiting the clearance from the PMO. With every passing second, the suspense grew as everyone waited with bated breath. The clearance finally came at around 6 pm. This press conference was unarguably the toughest I ever had. Later I noted in my diary, ’The Conference took place in the afternoon in a packed hall. The aggressive posture of the media reflected angst. Fortunately, in the hour-long interaction I kept my cool and handled the questions reasonably well. One could clarify the approach of the government and the purpose seemed to have been served”. It was perhaps much more than that. It was the severest of all tests in my career.
Excerpted from “No More a Civil Servant”
Anil Swarup has served as the head of the Project Monitoring Group, which is currently under the Prime Minister’s Offic. He has also served as Secretary, Ministry of Coal and Secretary, Ministry of School Education.
More than Chintan, it’s time to worry
A strong Opposition is necessary to protect democracy; will Congress be able to stand this test?
The day Congress’ three-day Nav Sankalp Chintan Shivir concluded in Udaipur, the BJP’s two-day Chintan Shivir began in Ahmedabad. A discussion over these two camps is quite natural. Every person who believes in democracy wants a strong Opposition. On one hand, BJP has a dedicated team with Narendra Modi and Amit Shah active round the clock and working tirelessly every day of the week and chalking out strategy every moment, and on the other, what is the condition of Congress? The question before everyone is what is the message that came out of the three-day Nav Sankalp Chintan Shivir of Congress in Udaipur? Did it invigorate the party workers spread across the country? How is Congress preparing for the coming Assembly elections or for the 2024 Lok Sabha elections? And of course, when will Congress get a full-time president? Many such questions are awaiting answers.
After the Chintan Shivir, the Congress gave the slogan ‘Bharat Jodo’! When this slogan was coined, a veteran Congress leader who dedicated his whole life to the party, told me that the party should first put its own house in order! India will automatically connect with the Congress! “When your party itself is not connected, what is the point of talking about the country?” When G-23 leaders talk about reforms in the party organisation, they are considered rebels. But the most important thing is that for a strong democracy, a strong Opposition is necessary and it is the moral responsibility of the Congress to give one. It has been the country’s oldest party and has been leading the nation for a long time. The real discussion in the Chintan Shivir should have been on the issue of why Congress is not able to understand the mood of the people. Why is the voter not able to believe in it? What is the reason that the party got cut off from the people at the grassroots level? Rahul Gandhi himself is saying this. The leaders at the Chintan Shivir should have expressed concern over this and come out with a roadmap to connect with the people but nothing of the sort happened. How will you understand the sentiments of the people and how will you explain your point of view to them?
If Rahul Gandhi arrived by train to attend the Udaipur camp, the objective was clear that he wanted to connect with the masses. He was being welcomed at every station till as late as 5 am and he was reciprocating by meeting the workers too. This is good but what about the local Congress leaders from Udaipur who sought to know why the party high command did not meet them? Just imagine how disappointed the Congress leaders and activists from Udaipur must have been? Such a disappointment kills enthusiasm. One more question remains unanswered as to why the Congress did not invite its ministers and MPs to such an important Chintan Shivir? Congress is in power only in Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh and it is a ruling partner in Maharashtra. It has only 53 MPs, yet not all had been invited.
Even the ministers of Rajasthan were not invited! 450 leaders were called for the camp out of which 430 attended. More than half of them were youths who are supporters of Rahul Gandhi. The rest were those leaders who have been occupying various posts in Congress for a long time. Ask them what steps they have taken to strengthen the party in recent years and they will have no answers. Instead of strengthening the party, these leaders spend their energy settling scores with each other. A young Congress leader asked me how many of the top leaders have a mass base? Can they win elections on their own? This question is valid. As long as the party does not send such black sheeps to political exile, revitalisation of the party will remain a mere dream!
Congress has decided to launch ‘Bharat Jodo’ campaign from Kanyakumari on October 2. A Congress observer asked me why is the Congress’ campaign not being launched from Kashmir when usually such campaigns begin from Kashmir to Kanyakumari? He himself gave the answer that if the campaign started from Kashmir, Ghulam Nabi Azad would have to be taken along. Azad saheb has expressed his opinion many times to reform the party organisation, so how could he be taken along? He has been a part of the G-23.
To take him along would have meant bowing down to the critics! Hearing all this, I remembered the couplet of the great personality of the 15th century Sant Kabir who says, ‘Nindak niyare raakhiye…’ This means you should have critics close to you, for only then you will know your weaknesses. You will be able to improve, and you will be able to walk on a better path. The army of sycophants has always been responsible for the sinking of the ship.
The Congress leaders who have spoken bitterly to make the party better are not foes of the party. They are not agents of the BJP. They should be heard. Does the party think why the youth leaders are moving away from it? The party had great expectations when it brought Hardik Patel into its fold. Why did he leave then? While parting ways, he said his condition was as if the new groom had been sterilised! Why did Sunil Jakhar leave the party? The bitter things Jakhar spoke about should have been the subject of Chintan Shivir. The BJP is welcoming leaders of all parties to its fold and yet Congress is not bothered.
This may sound bitter but it is true that the party does not have any roadmap at this juncture. Sonia ji has held the post of interim president for almost three years. Surely she is trying her best but who will deny that without a full-time president, how will the confidence of the workers be boosted? Rahul Gandhi says that he will not become the president and his caucus wants to see him in the president’s chair so that he remains the power centre.
Congress leaders attribute the precarious state of the party to the uncertainty over Rahul Gandhi. Moreover, the party seems to be confused about its policies of secularism. Now Congress leaders are doing exactly what BJP is doing!
But the moot question is, does the writ of high command run large at the lowest level? In fact, when there is a delay in the decision at the upper level, it results in confusion, and the morale of the workers breaks down. Congress has taken a long time to put its house in order. Nevertheless, the Congress followers are still waiting for it in every village!
The author is the chairman, Editorial Board of Lokmat Media and former member of Rajya Sabha.
Everyone is curious to know about the outcome of Congress’ Nav Sankalp Chintan Shivir. Has any roadmap been drawn which the Congress can firmly follow in the coming elections? Can it play the role of a strong Opposition necessary for democracy? A slogan of ‘Bharat Jodo’ has been given for sure, but the need of the hour is for Congress to put its own house in order and revitalise itself!
Social perception of violence against women
In our nation, violence against women is a serious communal issue. This problem goes mostly unnoticed. Violence and abuse against women have a variety of causes and explanations. Whenever a crime against a woman occurs, an inept law enforcement administration is blamed for the increase in the number of complaints filed.
Even the most stringent regulation has little influence on the rising crime rate. It’s awful that there’s a social stigma attached to accepting various forms of violence against women. Rising levels of violence against women have resulted in psychological and physical problems. This paper attempts to raise awareness urging for a change in the attitude towards the women who have been the victim of different kinds of violence. It also mentions the conditions of women and how they have been suffering. It gives insights into the laws pertaining to cope gender violence. This paper analyses the rise of violence against women in the times of them past as well as scenarios of current times. The paper recommends ways to tackle gender violence as a bell of caution is being sounded in today’s time.
Keywords: Violence, Gendered, Psychological, Abuse, Victim.
Crime against women is a deep-rooted and fascinating dichotomy in that it is the most universal human rights violation while also being the least reported. Whether at home or in the wider world, women in our patriarchal society have been subjected to many forms of discrimination. Since ancient times, women have been viewed as a weaker gender, making it simpler to perpetrate violence against them. They are made to feel extremely vulnerable, which encourages them to suffer. Women are exposed to ferocity committed by people whether at home or in the outside world. Our law protects women and gives her justice and provides them with equality. Our constitution ensures that people are not being subjected to any kind of unbiased treatment towards anyone.
According to Article 15 of the Constitution of India, there is a prohibition on discrimination on basis of gender and it in the same manner directs and empowers the administration to endeavor strict methods for females. Our constitution also grants women various rights, such as equitable treatment for all, but when it comes to putting these rights into practise, the government consistently fails. The Crimes committed against women have been an obstacle to the enhancement of the society and the condition is not unknown to anyone in power. If we look into the current times there has been an increase in violent cases especially rape. A report states that a total of 717 cases of rape were enumerated from January to May 2020, which elevated to 787 in the time period of 2021. The information tells that there has been a hike of 9.76 percent in rape cases during this time span.
If we go forward to 2021, when we must stay at home due to a pandemic, it will be difficult for women to raise their voices since at this time, women are obliged to stay at home and endure and suffer as they neglect to report crimes against their family members. Working women had to juggle employment and domestic responsibilities. For roughcasting the effect and obstacle deriving from economic uncertainty, the ladies turn out to be their target. During the Covid-19 pandemic, violence against women has taken several forms. This stems from women’s struggle to strike a balance between their personal and professional lives.
WOMEN’S STATUS AND THE CAUSES OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
The patriarchal laws and arrangements of societal practises, traditions, and norms allow for a clear identification of violence against women in both public and private life, raising a significant question regarding the lack of respect provided to women. Furthermore, it leads to a protracted and exhausting fight for justice. The economic, cultural, and religious structure of Indian society, which may be described as a bigot culture where women are harassed, beaten, and raped within homes, in the outer world, and even between the public, is really bad. The patriarchal beliefs even accept and elevate sex discrimination as well as violence against females irrespective of age. India has been a patriarchal-based society since time immemorial. Violence against women is ingrained inside the mindset of the families while degrading women as an object and treating women as an obstacle is just evidence of their mindset. The causes of violence against women are numerous. One of the grounds which steer to violence against women is the audacity of the criminal. Often, we see that the criminal’s mind reflects on himself to be exempted from the consequences of the violent acts that he has been unswerving. Some individuals are instinctive with the approach of controlling attitude which shall not be said to be dangerous as it arises under the realm of social conduct and ordinary disparity nature between individuals. There is a huge gender disparity in doing violence against women. Removing any kind of gender disparity means eliminating all types of inequality against women and eliminating obstructions that avoid women from being totally equal with all males and comprehending their Human Rights. One of the most extensive and universal obstacles is violence against women. These obstacles create havoc in the lives of the women and they come due to a lack of knowledge and awareness among individuals.
Women often feel obligated to be around harassing men because of unequal access to education across the country, and the severe lack of legal protection leaves them with no choice but to suffer at the hands of their maternal families in their homes. Women are frequently subjected to irrational behaviour, which weakens them as individuals and has negative consequences for their health. The important point to remember is that victims who have been harmed by criminals’ actions as a result of gender-based violence or any other form of based violence should not be found liable or blamed.
TYPES OF VIOLENCE
Women’s violence can be classified into several categories. These categories represent the various types of crimes that a woman may encounter throughout her life. Physical violence against women is not the only form of violence against women. It is a broad term that encompasses all forms of violence, including sexual, sensitive, psychological, and financial abuse. Any type of violence against women is not bearable and the criminals or offenders deserve punishments, imprisonments or even capital punishments should be provided to them if required. The effects of ferocity can be overwhelming to a woman’s generative fitness as well as to other features of her bodily and psychological well-being. In the accumulation of instigating injury, the violence upsurges women’s long-term danger, raising a lot of mental as well as physical health complications including chronic discomfort, disability and may put an end to her own life through depression. Mainly, violence ensues in three circumstances – at the household or to her own self, at the community level and the state and at each phase, the social establishments fulfil dangerous functions in upholding the violence .
Self-directed: Often we look at parents, lineages and even colleagues passing taunts and oppressing the females in their houses or while working with them. These taunts reflect how weak they are and sometimes even to women who were the victims of some kind of violence. These constant picking on the violence they went through leave a huge impact on their lives, sometimes making their life even more miserable and scarred forever. Emotional exploitation is causing injury to their self-respect and mentally harassing them verbally. Various women commit self-harm for a myriad of purposes, but when viewed in the context of their psychosocial and economic circumstances, it appears to be completely understandable behaviour that contributes to the women’s poor mental health.
Suicide is a major mental health concern, aside from self-abuse. It’s also crucial to remember that suicide is the consequence of a combination of factors in a person’s life, rather than a single incident or debate. They commit suicide because of the abuse they face, the harassment they go through, problems of marrying at an early age with shattered dreams, the fact that they are not allowed to marry outside family choices, not allowed to go outside late at night, body shaming and several other factors which make them feel insecure about themselves hurting their self-confidence. Apart from the pressure of society, there are also other heinous crimes like rape, acid attack, etc. which contribute to this.
Interpersonal violence: Any act of violence or aggression towards other women by known individuals or family members. Women are subjected to a variety of sorts of violence, and when it is perpetrated by someone they know, it tends to harm them significantly more and leave a lasting mark on their lives, whether it is physical abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment, or even honour killing. The Advocate Netra Jaisingh in the film Thappad, for example, very accurately captured the same emotional exploitation where her husband disparages her in every situation and tries to affront her life and dishonour her for the accomplishment she gained. Very frequently we see that how women get slapped or beaten and sometimes even burned by their husband and family for dowry money or even for doing any work in a wrong manner or for not obeying them in any way .
Reports even come out to show that women are being asked to do sexual acts or forced to have sex and if they do not obey, then they even get threatened by their husbands. These are examples of Interpersonal violence that a woman goes through in her life. Apart from these examples in some rural as well as in urban areas, we find the concept of early marriages which are not yet declared null and void but declared as voidable which often is not the case when women are on the other side. At home, these types of irrational behavior are either ignored or not talked about and women often abstain from standing against these acts because it appears to them as a matter of a little issue and not a big act of physical violence. Physical violence is time after time getting increased in our country especially when we see it in the current challenging times.
In the current scenarios of COVID-19, there has been a steady upsurge in the numbers of domestic violence throughout the globe and this has been the case in the previous few months. Various worldwide associations or organizations took the perception of a worldwide increase in domestic violence cases as a result of physical violence. Many states have reported a 15-30% increase in the number of violent actions requests acknowledged from those women who were suffering in locked places because of domestic violence. These issues need to be addressed by the authorities in charge.
Community Violence: Despite the country’s desire to prevent violence against women, it continues to be widespread in certain sections of the country. Rape, abuse, sexual harassment, acid assaults, female genital mutilation, and other forms of physical, sexual, and mental violence are all common in the community. India is regarded as one of the most dishonest countries in the world when it comes to sexual abuse against women. Victims of rape are gradually reporting the sexual assaults, abuses, and rapes that criminals have perpetrated against them. Women are becoming more self-governing and prepared, to reduce their likelihood to account for the crime that they are facing. Rape comprises a total of about 12% of all crimes that happen against women in our country. Our country’s average rate of rape cases that are reported is about 6.3% per 100,000 of the population. The issue about rapes happening is that about 99% of the cases of sexual abuse go unreported which creates it challenging to find the true figure of rape cases. These stats create it terrible for a female to live in such an atmosphere where the woman cannot even live by herself alone. These are just a few statistics related to rape apart from the other crimes which a woman goes through in her life. In India, the practice of Female Genital Mutilation is quite common and there are different socio-educational causes for genital mutilation, which differ from place to place. There is a profound injustice against females. Although there are different unconventional reasons given for genital mutilation. People still follow it because it has been followed as a tradition. Genital Mutilation is a chronic expression that has inhospitable effects on the emotional well-being of the sufferers. The harshness of the disfigurement relates to the harm suffered. Since anesthesia is hardly ever made available to the victim during the system there is severe discomfort. There are other various acute effects for example bleeding, swelling, etc. risking the well-being of the females and in some cases, they even die . Even the concept of acid attack is a dreadful attack and has been increasing nowadays. Men have given themselves an option to destroy the appearance and the life of women. The aim behind this criminal act is very rudimentary that is negation to do matrimonial, sex and passion, refusal to love offers, etc. to prompt the mentioned. Apart from all of this, women also experience violence in the form of honour killings, human trafficking, or prostitution, and in certain cases, HIV infection has manifested itself in their bodies. As sex trafficking has grown in popularity, females have become more vulnerable to HIV infection due to a lack of knowledge about high-risk sexual behaviours. Similarly, HIV transmission spreads by worldwide and instinctive sex trafficking.
GENDERED VIOLENCE OF WOMEN IN INDIAN LEGAL MECHANISM
The government recognises a variety of legislative frameworks aimed at ensuring women’s rights, instituting joint segregation on various forms of cruelty to women, and providing aid to working women who like to work late at night. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act of 2005 was passed to safeguard women in our country from all forms of domestic violence. It also protects all the women who have been or were entangled with the offender and are exposed to different kinds of violence.
Indian Penal Code (1860) contains preparations to defend women from the expenditure of attack, violence and other different types of offenses and the Code of Criminal Procedure (1973) also protects women from such acts of violence done to her. The Hindu Marriage Act
(1955) offered betrothal and allowed it on specific prearranged grounds. It gives proper rights to women with regards to marriage and separation if the women are not safe at their home or feel unsafe in their matrimonial house. Shariat (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act (1986) defends the Constitutional rights of Muslim women who have been alienated by or have attained beatings or violence in any form from their husbands.
The Dowry Prohibition Act (1961) prohibits the unkind or enchanting of dowry from her husband or even by her family members. Throughout the 1970s, many foreign nations have approved various legal procedures against Domestic Violence but in our nation, we contain a few legal procedures for the protection of the women from any kind of violence she has been subjected to. Further, during the period of the 1990s an attempt was put forth by the administration to permit the law for the safety of women from ferocity. But after bearing in mind the growing situations of crime against women in the country, the government finally passed the Domestic Violence Act in the year 2005. This law also included cruelty under Section 498A of IPC. This law was added to deal with crimes happening inside the home. But crimes were happening at workplaces as well and which is managed by the Act of Sexual Harassment.
The Act of Sexual Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act was passed in the year 2013. Further, the Supreme Court comprehended that we require such lawmaking after the case of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan. This law was passed to give protection to women from any kind of sexual violence or harassment who were working. This legislation gives the provision of setting up of an internal committee at every organization for solving the problem of sexual violence on women at the workplace. The Act describes sexual abuse on women at her workplace through doing any physical or sexual violence. Apart from the law governing sexual harassment, the law also safeguards the women who are subjected to heinous crimes like rape.
According to Section 376 of the IPC, there are diverse types of enactments that will form as a constituent of rape. Section 375 provides details about a sexual offense of rape. There were a lot of insufficiencies in the enactment involving rape and it was suggested that some alterations are needed in law . Often, we see that women are hampered in terms of having proper admission to justice. There is a huge illiteracy rate among men or women and they also have social gaps which prevent them from going or taking any severe activities against the carnages faced by them. The Criminal Law Act was amended in 2013 which is also known as Nirbhaya Act and it was again amended in the Kathua rape case occasioned in the portrayal of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018, which, for the first time, placed the death penalty as a possible sentence for the rape of a girl under the age of 12. Crimes like rape often take an angle of stalking which also in itself is a crime under the Information and Technology Act, 2000. which also safeguards women from stalkers and cybercriminals and protects their right to privacy and right to live with dignity. Cybercriminals are often seen to take obscene pictures of women, send them wrong and immoral comments and try to sexually abuse the women.
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS PROTECTING WOMEN FROM VIOLENCE
Our government has incorporated the vast majority of constitutional law acts into its domestic law, despite the fact that it still needs to be improved in order to comply with international norms. Our women deserve to be treated equally, and Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees that they will be treated equally. We witness how rude it is when a woman is subjected to unfairness and unjust treatment at home or at work. They are frequently victims of horrible crimes and exploited on the outside.
This Right against Exploitation is professed under Article 23 of the Constitution where it states “Prohibitions on Human Trafficking and Forced Labor.” Human Trafficking points out the deal and buying of humans mostly for the aim of sexual oppression, forced sex work or forced labor. Another form of slavery is Beggar. This is a practice of forced employment that states forcing an individual to work for no reimbursement.
Therefore, Article 23 is an overly broad concept which safeguards an individual from doing any illegal work involuntarily. It also prohibits compelling a woman or child into prostitution. Articles 21 and 23 equally strengthen the responsibility of the nation to distinguish, release and reinstate liberated protected workers. The Constitution allows the government to make any special law for the protection of women against any kind of violence.
Therefore, Article 23 is an overly broad concept which safeguards an individual from doing any illegal work involuntarily. It also prohibits compelling a woman or child into prostitution. Articles 21 and 23 equally strengthen the responsibility of the nation to distinguish, release and reinstate liberated protected workers. The Constitution allows the government to make any special law for the protection of women against any kind of violence.
Women did not have various rights when compared with men in earlier times. There is also a big taboo that women are substantially weaker than men and because of this authenticity, they have been mistreated. Due to this type of perpetual ill behavior, the financial welfare of women has straightaway turned out to be categorically dreadful. The Constitution gives women the right to live and liberty and this liberty is taken away from their family, friends and workplaces as well.
INADEQUACY OF LEGAL PROVISIONS AND FEW RECOMMENDATIONS
Gender imbalance should be prioritised because it is a critical component of reducing violence against women. Promoting, safeguarding, and realising women’s human rights should be the mission statement. There should be norms and agendas in place to encourage women and men to learn as a means of achieving gender equality in society. Different activities can be implemented to create awareness about the elimination of gender disparity and the rise in violence against women. Apart from that, it will shape people’s perceptions on how to treat women. Violence will be reduced if the judiciary receives backing from the legislature and the government. We look into different kinds of punishments given for various crimes that are not as appropriate as that of the nature of the crime especially when we talk about the concept of rape and sexual assault on women. The punishment of these heinous crimes should be tremendous making some kind of statement for the offenders. The laws should be well enforced and the administration should ensure that women are not just safe at their home but even when they go for their work because we see a plethora of sexual harassment cases time after time by the people of the management of the organization. Unless there is adequate stress on growing sensitization at the workplaces as well, no legal improvement could be achieved.
From the case of Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan case, we can also see that the formation of the Sexual harassment committee will be able to help the agonize from any such incidents inside the workplace.
All the organizations which do the community work, associations of government, and NGOs should also advance and should spread their efforts in making awareness about reducing sexual harassment at workplaces.
Opinion2 years ago
South Block’s mistakes will now be corrected by Army
Sports2 years ago
When a bodybuilder breaks Shoaib’s record
News2 years ago
PM Modi must take governance back from babus
Spiritually Speaking2 years ago
Spiritual beings having a human experience
News2 years ago
Chinese general ordered attack on Indian troops: US intel report
Legally Speaking2 years ago
Law relating to grant, rejection and cancellation of bail
Sports2 years ago
West Indies avoid follow-on, England increase lead to 219
Royally Speaking2 years ago
The young royal dedicated to the heritage of Jaipur