Why does the Indian Government formulate wrong laws?

Before going into the reasons as to why does the Indian Government do so, let us have a look as to what exactly do we mean by “Wrong Laws”? The following 2 criteria are very important to be considered while formulating any law:-

1. Laws are meant to restrain citizens from committing crimes and harming other people without getting punished.
2. Laws must apply equally to all citizens and discrimination of citizens in the eyes of law on any basis in not only unconstitutional but also inhuman in nature.

Any law that does not adhere to any of the above criteria, then it’s a Wrong Law. Also, specific to India, even the Constitution of India does not permit discrimination of citizens in the eyes of law on the basis of sex, caste or religion (Article 14). Yet, the Indian Governments, over the past several decades of India’s independence, have always conceptualized, formulated and implemented wrong laws, that are anti-male and gender biased in nature. And, still more being in pipeline, these laws are heavily loathed against men that not only violate their basic fundamental rights and human rights, but also go all the way to inflict terror onto them legally.

 

Some of the examples of these wrong anti-male laws are:

 

1. Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (498A).
2. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA).
3. Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) (125 CrPC).

A detailed description of all such wrong anti-male laws is available at Gender Arsenal.

We will see what each of the above law has to say,

1. Section 498A: Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty. Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Detailed description of the section is available here.
2. PWDVA: This is a mammoth act, in itself, which contains numerous anti-male provisions which can imprison a man, rob him off his finances (under the cute name of maintenance) or throw him out of his own house in a legitimate manner (under the cute name of “Right to Residence”) merely on a complaint by any woman claiming to have lived with the man under a roof. Detailed description of the act is available here.
3. 125 CrPC:  If any person leaving sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain-
   1. His wife, unable to maintain herself, or
   2. His legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or
   3. His legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself, or
   4. His father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself. A Magistrate of’ the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate as such magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct. Detailed description of the section available here.

All the above laws are based on the social presumptions that ubiquitously and stereotypically, under all circumstances,

1. It’s the woman who is the victim and it’s the man who is the aggressor.
2. It’s the woman who never lies and it’s the man who is not trustworthy.
3. It’s the woman who has suffered and it’s the man who has enjoyed.
4. It’s the woman who needs justice and it’s the man who deserves punishment.
5. It’s a woman and a man in a man’s world.

These social presumptions are dangerous social time bombs and, when packaged in laws, they are simply “Weapons of Social Terror”. Men, the disposable gender they are, are the innocuous victims of these weapons of social terror.

Laws are a direct reflection of societal attitudes as the lawmakers, who conceive the laws, are part of the same society in which we thrive. They are born and brought up in the same society that considers men as the disposable and gives no thought in harboring anti-male attitudes and in allowing anti-male legal provisions.

Let’s take the example of Section 498A, it says, “Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty”. It is a direct reflection of the attitude that only a husband is capable of inflicting cruelty on wife and only husband’s relatives inflict cruelty on the wife. It does not take into consideration the following two possibilities,

1. Wife capable of inflicting cruelty on husband, physically, emotionally, mentally, financially.
2. Husband’s in-laws capable of inflicting cruelty on husband.

Because, we have no section that is specifically in favor of husbands and when the Government is questioned about protection of men, the answer given is that “men have the whole of IPC.” But, the Government is conveniently ignoring a fact that the IPC applies to women as well. Then what is the need of a special law under Section 498A?

A clear example of misandry and male-disposability, as Section 498A is a proven weapon of terror that has resulted in millions of innocent men and their families being thrown behind the bars without trial or investigation, merely on the basis of a complaint.

On one hand, we have a law called the TADA repealed because a few politicians feel that it can lead to wrong jailing of people and here, we have a law wherein, no less than 7.5 million innocent men have been jailed since its inception, merely on the basis of a complaint, without trial or investigation and the Government is still in doldrums, whether it should amend that law or make it stringent!

Such a behavior is clear evidence of unwarranted triumph of emotion over logic with an unbalanced tilt of power against humanity – again a reflection of pervert social attitudes.

Now, let us take the case of the PWDVA, referred to as the DV Act herein. However, before going into the DV Act, let’s take some real life examples of Domestic Violence on men by their wives.

1. Kitply, a leading manufacturer of plywood came up with an ad wherein the wife slaps the husband on their first night because the furniture was not made of kitply.
2. ICICI Lombard came up with an ad concept wherein the wife calls the husband as an ‘IDIOT’ for not buying the ICICI Lombard insurance.
3. Star Plus – the entertainment channel came up with the concept of a reality show in which husbands were supposed to take care of the household while their wives would go holidaying and would also monitor the husband.

These are just some examples of socially accepted anti-male attitudes and unchallenged instances of domestic violence on men by their wives.

These ads and TV programs clearly depict as to how the society perceive violence against men. It’s pure entertainment for the society!

To add to this, I had challenged the show on Star Plus citing that it generates a feeling that while women are doing household work, men go holidaying; however, that’s not a reality as when a woman does household work, the man slogs to earn money, but the show is depicting something else. I had also written a letter to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting that the show be banned; however the ministry replied that the show was not violating any guidelines. It simply means the guidelines are anti-male in nature and have yet gone unchallenged.

So, when the very society, from which the lawmakers come and whom the society elects as representatives, harbors a feeling that domestic violence against men is a source of entertainment, no wonder that the Government has come up with a law called the DV Act which is a legal source of inflicting violence on a man.

As per the DV Act, the remedy of any complaint of a wife against a husband is either acrimonious maintenance or a part of husband’s property, which is nothing but treatment of men as FREE ATM MACHINE.

The DV Act, though passed off as a civil law has terms like jail, bail, arrest in it and also follows the CrPC. This is another attempt by the Government of India to fool the citizens of India. The Government knew that with Section 498A being already there, it would be difficult to bring in another unconstitutional and wrong criminal law that is anti-male in nature and so DV Act was passed off as a civil law containing criminal provisions.

But again, here also, the Act presumes that all spousal violence in unidirectional (from male to female) in nature and even if instances of a husband harassed by wife comes to forth, it is dismissed as a one-off incident and the husband is denied justice. This is again a skewed social attitude that violence against women is a crime and violence against men is a social service.

And with such an attitude, it should be no surprise that we have one more wrong law called the DV Act.

Let us now take the case of Section 125 CrPC. Section 125 CrPC, puts the entire burden of maintaining parents, wife and children on a single person – the HUSBAND, yet another example of treatment of men as FREE ATM MACHINE.

Moreover, as per Section 125, if a man fails to comply, he can even be imprisoned. Now the moot question that arises is, how can a man jailed be expected to earn livelihood? It is a completely illogical and unscientific legal provision that merely satiates the inherent misandry in the society.

Recently, in Bangalore, there was a case wherein a paralytic man was brought to the court in handcuffs. His crime – he was unable to maintain his wife’s greedy desire of monthly maintenance of Rs. 25000. His old and sick mother used to go the jail to feed him daily. This, not being enough, the man made a plea before the court that he be exempted from paying maintenance to his wife as he is unable to do so, yet the judge said, “I want to listen to the wife once before passing any order.” This is nothing but a superficial display of attempts to deliver justice while harboring male hatred inside.

It would not be out of place to mention here that there have been uncountable instances wherein courts have passed acrimonious maintenance orders against men without giving them a chance to present their side. These orders have been passed without verifying the claims of wives and taking their statements are GOSPEL TRUTH.

This is a social expectation from men, that a man must finish off his life feeding his family and he has no right to live a life for himself and if he wishes to do so, we have the JAIL for him.

And that too, it’s not a choice given to him, it’s an imposition on him and any failure to compliance is met with iron hands. I fail to understand how this is not terrorism and how can any sane society inflict terror on its individual lest it does not consider the individuals as its own part.

Men, especially those not in power positions – the 99% of the beta males, have always been exploited, used and terrorized by the society. On one hand, there are laws (498A and DV Act to name a few) that ruin the lives of men on a mere complaint that’s uninvestigated and unverified and on the other hand, the same men are expected to slog like donkeys to feed their own enemies who complain against the man if he does not serve them. And any man who does not wish to do so is called a criminal!

And, we call it a civilized society! By what means is this society civilized that inflicts so much violence on the very men who have laid down their lives and sacrificed their likes and interests to build the foundations of the society and made so many wonderful innovations and discoveries that makes life easy and comfortable.

After realizing all this, only one question comes to my mind, “Does this society deserve the services of men?”

Coming back to the topic at hand, as to why does the Government formulate wrong laws, it’s very simple that no Government can afford to go against popular social rituals especially in a democracy wherein Governments are dependent on votes and every policy and law is a part of what is known as the “Vote Bank Politics”.

For e.g., in case of Sri Sathya Sai Baba, despite numerous allegations of corruption, sex crimes against him and so on, there was no action taken. The society was blinded by his charms to such an extent that it would have been a political suicide to ‘touch’ him.

Similarly, in case of men’s rights, male hatred and male disposability is so high, visible and rampant in the society that it is clearly a case of political suicide to do even an iota of favor to men. And the loudest carrier of anti-male social attitudes is the media that leaves no stone unturned in publishing things demeaning men and also goes that extra mile to not only justify crimes by women but also suppress voices of dissent.

Specifically, Indians believe the media a lot and that makes it more difficult for the Govt. to take any steps, even if it wants to.

The root of male abuse lies in the social attitudes towards men and till the time it changes, men have no choice but to remain oppressed and terrified under Wrong Laws.

Comments

comments