Delhi High Court- Having sex with woman on false promise of marriage is #Rape #Vaw

PTI : New Delhi, Sun Jun 09 2013,
High courtHaving sex with woman on false promise of marriage is rape: High Court. (Reuters)
Having sexual relations with a woman on false promise of marriage amounts to rape, the Delhi High court has said.”Having sexual relations with a woman against her will or without her consent also amounts to rape under the IPC. If the consent was obtained on a false assurance or promise of marriage, the consent cannot be considered to be full and free and it would be a case of rape,” Justice R V Easwar said.The court made the observation while rejecting anticipatory bail plea of Abhishek Jain in a case lodged by his wife alleging that he had sex with her prior to their

marriage on the promise that he would marry her.

In her complaint, the woman also said that he married her only after she lodged the case with police against him.

“It would prima facie appear that the marriage was gone through only to persuade the complainant to withdraw her complaint of February 25, 2013.

“Immediately after the marriage, the applicant started physically abusing the complainant, apparently, in the hope that she would leave him, but when she filed a complaint, the accused was forced to apply for bail,” the court said.

The woman had filed a complaint in February, 2013 with the Rani Bagh Police Station alleging that on several occasions before the marriage, the applicant (Jain) had raped her after falsely promising to marry her.

However, on March 4, 2013, the applicant and the complainant got married at the Arya Samaj Vivah Mandir, Ghaziabad and the marriage registration was done by the

Registrar, Hindu Marriages, Ghaziabad, the complaint said.

Referring to the contents of the FIR lodged by the woman against her husband, the court said, “The FIR narrates the physical abuse which the complainant had suffered at the hands of the applicant after the marriage…The FIR further narrates that the accused even used to tell the complainant that ‘he had married me (her) only to make me withdraw the complaint.’

“Several instances are narrated in the FIR about threats and physical abuse suffered by the complainant not only from the applicant but also by his family members who had conspired together to cheat her and get her married to him only to make her withdraw the complaint of rape against him.”


Memorandum to Chief Justice of Bombay High Court – Complaint of rape against Dr Rustom Soonawalla #Rape #Vaw

6th June 2013


The Chief Justice,

High Court,


Reference: Concerns of women’s groups regarding the manner in which the complaint against Dr. Rustom Sonawala is dealt with. (Anticipatory Bail Application No. 578 of 2013)


We, the members of women’s groups, organisations and individuals are concerned about developments in the complaint of rape filed against Dr. Rustom Sonawala at Khar Police Station on 17.05.2013.

We have been fighting for the rights of victims in cases of sexual assault in Mumbai and various parts of the country for many decades. In view of the increasing number of cases of sexual assault and brutal rapes, laws regarding rape and sexual assault have been recently amended to bring in stringent punishments. After the Justice Verma Committee report and the recent happenings in the country, we felt that the Courts too were taking the issue of violence against women more seriously and sensitively.


Background: A 26 year old woman, who was taking treatment from Dr. Rustom Sonawala since August 2012, filed a complaint of rape against him on the evening of 17th May, 2013. The filing of the first information report as well as the medical examination of the complainant was concluded by 7 am of the 18th of May.

After the complainant and her husband returned home on the same day, 18th May, the police called them to Dadar to identify the doctor, as they had located his whereabouts in Parsi colony.  On locating and identifying the accused doctor, the two police personnel accompanied him in his car, asking the complainant to take a taxi. While the complainant as well as the police personnel reached the Khar police station, the accused Doctor managed to abscond while he was being accompanied by the police.

During protests that were being held against the doctor opposite his clinic, one of the neighbours informed some of the protestors, that the same doctor had also molested their daughter in the past.

This has raises several questions:

1.       Why did the police go to arrest the doctor in a taxi for which the complainant was made to pay and not in a police van?

2.       Why has no action been taken against the concerned police personnel and why have they not been suspended?

3.       Given the complicity of the entire machinery with the accused, how do we ensure a fair trial?

4.       How do we ensure that even the forensic and medical reports are not tampered with?

Further, the accused who had not been arrested and was absconding even after 10 days of the crime, on 29th May, 2013, moved the High Court seeking anticipatory bail, even as his application for anticipatory bail was pending before the Sessions Court at Greater Bombay, Mumbai. In the anticipatory bail application, the accused said through his lawyer that his blood and semen sample may be collected and he be given protection from arrest till the anticipatory bail application is finally decided in the Sessions Court. The victim’s advocate argued that the accused was absconding and in his absence no reliefs should be granted to him.
On 29th May, 2013 the Hon’ble Court passed an order directing the accused to deposit his passport and appear before the Khar Police Station. The Assistant Public Prosecutor was asked whether the court should pass an order of not arresting the accused or she would give an undertaking. The Assistant Public Prosecutor said that she would give an undertaking of not arresting the accused till his anticipatory bail was decided by the Hon’ble Sessions Court. The court asked by when they would do the medical examination and the Assistant Public Prosecutor said that there is no provision in law by which this medical examination can be done prior to arrest.  After her refusal to agree to do the medical test the court said it will hear the matter after vacation, that is, on 11th June, 2013 and till then the accused is protected, as the Assistant Public Prosecutor has given an undertaking regarding the same.

Sec. 54  of the Code of Criminal Procedure allows medical examination of the accused at the instance of the accused, if the examination of his body will afford evidence which will disprove commission by him of any offence or which will establish the commission by any other person of any offence against his body.

But the section is very clear that it is after arrest and that the accused will have to make an application to the Magistrate.

We fear that the Order of the Hon’ble High Court sets a wrong and dangerous precedent in terms of rape matters for many reasons.

The Accused was not present before the court and yet he was granted relief, which is never done, especially in rape matters. The medical evidence of semen, blood, injuries cannot be the sole basis of deciding whether rape was committed.  At present the law defines rape by penetration, [that is, penetration is enough to prove rape,]; nowhere does it say that it has to be coupled with the presence of DNA.

The FIR states that there was penetration; the presence of DNA and other factors is corroborative evidence.

If this order becomes final it not only  means that the rape accused can approach the courts to seek this kind of protection, but it will also mean that cases will be closed on the basis of DNA reports. And given the circumstances related above, one cannot be sure that these reports cannot not doctored or tampered with. DNA test can be evaluated during trial.

This also takes us to the conclusion that if traces of semen are not found, there is no rape. This goes counter to the recent Criminal Amendment Act, 2013.

The current situation also gives the accused the freedom to tamper with the evidence and witnesses considering the fact he was able to connive with police and abscond right in their presence.

The Hon’ble Court before giving relief to the Doctor ought to have considered the fact that the Doctor is a fugitive from Justice.

In fact he has obstructed the legal system by conniving with police personnel. It is obvious that in some way he was able to exercise undue influence on the police and thereby he could go absconding right in presence of the policemen.

The Hon’ble Court instead of granting him relief should have instructed him to first submit himself before the investigating team and also should have directed that a complaint be registered against the Doctor as well as the police for subverting the process by using undue influence.

It is indeed a question before all us citizens and women specifically, whether Justice is the prerogative of rich people only.

It is a worrying thought that this sort of judgment will act as a precedent in future cases. This goes counter to the present ethos after the 16th December 2012 rape case and its aftermath.
We hope you will relook at the judgment and do the needful.

Yours sincerely

Forum Against Oppression of Women, Mumbai



SAKHYA (women’s guidance cell)

Women Research and Action Group (WRAG)



CORO (for literacy)


Samajwadi Mahila Sabha

Stree Mukti Sanghatana

Anagha Sarpotdar

Kamayani Bali Mahabal

Address: 29, Bhatia Bhuvan, Babrekar Marg, Off Gokhale Road, Dadar (West), Bombay – 400 028


cc- Home Minister R R Patil Publicly apologise for failure to ensure safe chat space for women #Vaw #Online

Dear editor,

Mr. Ganesh Nadar fom Rediff had contacted me yesterday to participate
in a live chat today, and I agreed. Mr. Onkar Singh from Delhi‘s rediff
office came to my office today to facilitate the chat, which was to take
place from 2 pm to 3 pm. The chat had been advertised as an opportunity
to chat with me as one of the activists involved in the recent
anti-rape protests.
During the chat, someone with a handle ‘RAPIST
repeatedly intervened in capital letters. In one ‘question’ he said,
“Kavita tell women not to wear revealing clothes then we will not rape
them.” The same man then posted another question several times: “Kavita
tell me where I should come and rape you using condom.” Both questions
were in block capitals and very visible. Mr Nadar initially said live
chats cannot be ‘screened’ – which I know for a fat is not true since I
have been in such chats with other media groups. Later Mr Nadar said
that the man in the Rediff Mumbai office monitoring the chat failed to
spot the ‘RAPIST’ because there were ‘so many questions.’ I find this
difficult to believe since this was the only handle in capital letters
and the questions were also in capitals.
Yet, no one from Rediff
did anything to screen the guest – me – from such offensive questions,
or to block someone with a handle of ‘RAPIST’ from the chat!
Ganesh Nadar has informed me that Rediff has taken a screenshot of the
chat and is filing an FIR and sending the screenshot to Worli cyber
crime labs to identify the ‘RAPIST.’ But I am yet to get a copy of the
screenshot though I have asked for it; excuses are being made. I am also
yet to receive the FIR number. Mr Nadar is very vague and contradictory
about why the transcript of the chat is yet to be posted; whether the
RAPIST’s questions will be screened there; whether I will receive a
screenshot or only the transcript (which will only have the questions I
responded to); and other queries that I have.

I demand a public  apology from Rediff for its failure to ensure that a chat organised by
them was a safe space for me, a woman. Condoning and allowing such
intimidatory behaviour against women keeps women out of the online space
– just as rape keeps women off the streets. I resent this intimidation,
and in this instance, hold Rediff squarely responsible for failing to
keep ‘RAPIST’ out of the chat.
Expecting a public apology from you.
Kavita Krishnan,
Secretary, AIPWA

April 24, 2013 n


Petition- Odisha -Unjustified police action in violation of women’s dignity by the BDO



The Home Secretary,




We are disturbed and outraged at an incident in Odisha’s Kendrapada district, where the BDO of Rajakanika Block made a sexist and derogatory comment against women, and the instead of acting on the women’s complaint, the police force has instead admitted an FIR against a woman activist and is conducting raids to arrest her.
The sequence of events is as follows:

On 8th April, AIPWA’s Odisha Secretary Sabita Baraj along with 60 women activists of Rajkanika block, went to the local block office to protest regarding several local issues on the ‘grievance day’ declared by the local administration and Government. When they reached the Block office they found the gate closed, forcing them to wait outside in the severe heat. After two hours, the Block gate was opened by a peon and all the activists asked the BDO (block development officer) why the gate was closed on ‘grievance day’? The BDO told them, “Being women how can you dare to ask this question?” The women strongly protested this sexist comment by the BDO, and Sabita Baraj filed an FIR against the BDO.

After four hours the BDO filed cases against all the women activists, naming Sabita Baraj and charging them under Sections 506, 142, 148, 149, and 34A. But the police took no action against the BDO, and instead attempted to arrest Sabita Baraj and the other women activists based on the delayed FIR filed by the BDO. The police continues to conduct raids on the homes of CPI(ML) and AIPWA activists, searching for Sabita Baraj, with the SP of Kendrapada taking a special interest in doing so . 


We would like to ask:
1) On an officially designated day for local people to raise grievances, why did the BDO keep the Block office gate shut for hours? Why have FIRs been registered against women for having defended their right as citizens to question the BDO about the gate being shut, defeating the purpose of grievance day?

2) What action has been taken against the BDO for insulting women and being derelict in his constitutional obligations to uphold citizens’ and women’s rights?


It is shocking and outrageous that a woman activist and rural women protestors are being persecuted with FIRs and threats of arrest, only because they asserted their rights and equality, and confronted the BDO for his shockingly anti-women remarks.

We demand:

1)      The FIR against Sabita Baraj and other women must be withdrawn with immediate effect.
2)      Action must be taken against the BDO without further delay and he should be removed from the post pending enquiry.
3)      The SP of Kendrapada must face disciplinary action for having colluded in pursuing false and fabricated complaints against women and trying to intimidate and terrorise women by seeking to arrest and jail them.
Ranjana, Kavita ,Kalpana, and Kamayani

Women against Sexual Violence and State Repression


#Meghalaya Gangrape – A cry in the dark #Vaw

Esha Roy : Sun Apr 07 2013,  IE
The Sunday StoryThe victim’s closest friend Rabolin, who was with her when she was attacked
She was gangraped by 16 boys, nine of them juveniles. She was beaten, cut up and her genitals mutilated. She made it to hospital, but was sent home with first-aid. When she survived to fight, she ran into an indifferent administration and influential accused. Schools denied her admission, and others mocked and threatened her.Chances are you haven’t heard this 16-year-old’s story. Three days after the brutal attack on her, the Delhi bus gangrape would happen, and a grieving nation’s conscience would not find time or space for this distant town in remote Meghalaya.***

It was a dark, moonless night on December 13, 2012, in Williamnagar in East Garo Hills district. Most of the houses in the town were empty as people had gathered for the annual winter ‘Simsang’ festival. Like every year, the star attraction was a fashion show-cum-beauty pageant. That evening, among the jostling audience of youngsters were three teenage girls. They were excited, having convinced family members to let them go without male relatives.

Rabolin K Sangma, 16, says it was she who had convinced the other two, her closest friends, to come along. “We weren’t really interested in the festival. But I had to see the fashion show,” she says.

They left at 8.30 pm, before the show had ended. Fog had crept in by then and turned the trees on the isolated stretch they took past the Sacred Heart Church to soft shadows.

They had walked just a short while when they saw a group of boys coming towards them. “They were behaving strangely. I thought, this is not okay… but I didn’t say anything,” says Rabolin. Seconds later, the boys charged at them. “We started running and turned into a narrow lane. We cried for help,” Rabolin says.

One of her friends, also her cousin and neighbour, fell down and got left behind. “She got up but the boys had by then started pelting stones. One hit her and she fell down again. When they got her, they stopped chasing us. We hid inside a garage for hours. We heard her screaming but we were too scared to go back.”


Sixteen boys are believed to have proceeded to rape the victim, nine of whom were minors. The victim can’t say as she blacked out. The oldest of the rape accused is 19 years old, the youngest 12. Six are 18.

Defence counsel M L Thangal admits some of them participated directly in the assault, but adds others “just hung around to watch it”. “According to the FIR and the statement of the victim, the leader was 19-year-old Laston Marak, who told the others what to do. Laston was the victim’s brother’s friend but apparently did not recognise her. She was pinned to the ground, kicked and hit. They tore off her T-shirt and started knifing her through her jeans, only later taking it off. The victim remembers the first three boys who raped her, after which she lost consciousness,” says Thangal.

When she stopped responding, the boys stuck a knife into her vagina repeatedly to get her to react.

The victim regained consciousness at some point and realised she was lying naked. Laston allegedly started to rape her again, at which point she called out his name and asked him why he was doing it. “When she said his name, he asked, ‘Who are you?’. She told him and he realised he knew her brother. By then, there was just Laston and another boy there. They helped her put on her jeans and gave her a T-shirt and they dropped her back home,” says Thangal.

Meanwhile, as an eerie quiet fell again over the lane, the victim’s friends came out of hiding and stopped a biker for help. “He took us to the spot but by then she had disappeared and so had the boys. He then dropped us home,” says Rabolin.


All 16 accused have since been arrested and booked for rape, “common intention” and criminal conspiracy. On April 3, the trial commenced in a fast-track court with the examination of five witnesses. Interestingly, the police are not showing the FIR to anyone, including the victim’s family.

What has since emerged about the accused’s alleged behaviour has only added to the shock. According to the police, like the girls, the accused were present at Simsang. At the festival, they attacked a schoolteacher (no one knows why) and were carrying him to throw him into the nearby Simsang river when they spotted the victim and her friends. As they got distracted, the teacher fled. He was present at the hospital when the victim’s family brought her there later that night. He told the family about the attackers. The teacher has since disappeared.

The hospital medical report lists injuries on her neck, face and back as well as cigarette burns on her right hand. Her vagina had been mutilated. However, the attending doctor, says the family, just gave the victim an i-pill, eight stitches, some first-aid, a few painkillers, and sent her home.

The next day, a women’s rights activist, Jaynie N Sangma, took the victim back to the hospital. She would remain there for two weeks.

“She hadn’t been eating or drinking and couldn’t pass urine. I asked the doctor why she hadn’t been admitted and she said she had administered first aid. Initially, even the administration took the incident lightly and only after we held protests did they take up the case,” says Jaynie.

When the victim’s mother, who stays in Rongongre village, heard what had happened, she fainted. “I couldn’t recognise my own daughter. Her body was swollen. I asked what had happened to her. She started crying.”

“I expect to get 100 per cent conviction,” says public prosecutor P L Sebastian.


The victim has since moved out of Williamnagar. She had left her parents’ home in Rongongre, on the other side of the Simsang river, to attend school in the town, staying with her married older sister and her in-laws. A Class IX student, she had failed her final examinations and was looking to switch schools.

Rabolin prefers that her friend keep away. “One day in February, the two of us had gone to the market and the family of one of the accused started abusing her. Another day, the sister of another of the accused took her photo,” says Rabolin.

“When I realised the danger to her and us, I asked Jaynie to take her to Tura. One of the accused’s father is a surrendered militant and had threatened to take up arms again,” says the victim’s mother.

Jaynie took the girl to her home in Tura. “After several weeks, child protection officers came and took her away,” she says.


On March 25, the State Women’s Commission took up the case and took the girl into “protective custody”. Member Gamchi Tamre insists the commission acted for “the girl’s own protection” and to ensure her identity wasn’t exposed. “I couldn’t go the day of the incident, but I went as soon as possible,” Tamre says.

However, even the victim’s mother found it difficult to meet her in the commission’s custody. “I went to the shelter but after I had waited four hours, they told me I couldn’t meet her… I was never allowed to meet her alone,” she says.

The mother also claims that Tamre warned her that should she take the girl out of their custody, the government would not support the family. “I am a vegetable vendor and my husband doesn’t work. What option did we have?” she says.

Women’s groups say the reason for the commission’s actions was that one of the accused—a juvenile—is the nephew of Williamnagar MLA and Cabinet Minister for Social Welfare and Justice in the Meghalaya government Deborah Marak.

Asked who the Women’s Commission reports to, Tamre says, “We are a branch of the National Commission for Women… but we report to the social welfare department.”


On March 28, after much pressure, the victim was brought to Tura and allowed a five-minute interaction with a woman activist from Shillong, Agnes Kharsiing, and this journalist. “You can see she’s doing fine,” Women’s Commission member Angela Ingty said, ruling out any questions for the victim. “What is the need for talking?”

The victim was accompanied by three women protection officers. Her head covered with a dupatta, she sat huddled in a chair in a guesthouse in Tura, eyes downcast.

Looking small and frail, she said she was okay. “I like going to school. My favourite subject used to be science and I wanted to grow up to be a doctor,” she added nervously. She only looked up once and broke into a smile when she was told that Kharsiing had come from Shillong to meet her.

However, at least three schools in Tura refused to take her. “The headmaster of the Garo Union School said since she was an undertrial, they could not accept her. How can she be an undertrial when she is the victim?” says Jaynie. The headmaster, Stanley Momen, told The Sunday Express admissions in the school had finished by the time they were approached. “Why is everyone targeting me?” he said. “We are a semi-government school. There are government schools which these people should approach—this is a government matter. There is no question of admission in my school.”


After a PIL was filed alleging sloppy handling of the case, the girl was taken out of the protection of the Women’s Commission and handed over to the care of East Garo Hills District Commissioner V K Mantri on March 31. Mantri organised for the victim to attend school in Williamnagar.

The victim’s parents, however, felt she wouldn’t be safe in the town. They handed her over to a women’s group. On April 5, the girl finally got school admission with the help of the Garo Students’ Union. For her safety, it is not being revealed where.


At Williamnagar, the lane where the rape occurred remains isolated. Moss-covered walls block it from view of both the huts on the left and the government colony on the right.

At her sister’s home, the mother remembers the things her 16-year-old liked. “She is a good girl. She loved cooking, especially dried fish. In the evenings, she would watch Hindi serials on television. She wouldn’t understand the language but she loved them. She also liked dressing up and would save up to buy new clothes.”

Now, she adds, “I want her to study hard, get a job, become independent. There is no other future for her.”

She demands that the culprits be jailed for life and that Laston be hanged. “I have watched him and another accused grow up. They were my younger son’s friends. My eldest son warned me about them. They were the town goondas… I can’t believe that this is the guy who used to accompany my son on his fishing trips.”

Life has changed for Rabolin too. “I have gone out only a couple of times (since the incident), but I never leave home after sundown,” she says.

Talking about her friend, Rabolin says: “She never talked about it… withdrew into herself. Only once she told me, ‘I should have died on that very spot. I should have died right then and there’.”

At her sister’s home, one part of the victim’s past has already been erased. The bedroom that she used has been converted into a kitchen. Two tables with gleaming steel pitchers and a stove stand where her bed once was.


* The oldest, 19-year-old Laston Marak, is alleged to have been the ringleader, instigating the boys to commit the crime.

* He and co-accused Patrick Sangma, 18, were her brother’s friends.

* Five other accused are 18, including Platon Marak, Chengchow Sangma, Rikrak Sangma, Kisen Marak and Chingkam Marak.

* Of the nine juvenile accused, the youngest is 12.

* The gang was known to get into streetfights and rob truck drivers and shopkeepers.

In 2012,

Meghalaya saw 158 rapes

6 were gangrapes


Mumbai: Cops face camera for #Vaw awareness campaign to encourage women to lodge harassment complaints

Kainaz Karmakar and Harshad Rajadhyaksha of O&M shot a five-part TVC campaign with city cops to encourage women to lodge harassment complaints

March 17, 2013
Samarth Moray, Sunday Midday
Have you ever been threatened by a man, deterring you to lodge a police complaint? Have you clenched your fist in helplessness, rolled your eyes but decided to let it go? No more. Starting Thursday, five advertisements starring real cops are being aired on a television channel, urging women not to be afraid of approaching the police to lodge harassment complaints against men.

A police woman reaches out to women in one of the ads created by the ad agency

Kainaz Karmakar and Harshad Rajadhyaksha of ad agency O&M have launched this special ad campaign, which puts the focus on the Mumbai Police. Karmakar said, “After the Delhi gang-rape incident in December, Mumbai’s Joint CP Himanshu Roy published a statement in the newspaper saying that the force had undertaken initiatives to train them to deal with sensitive cases. He added that perhaps they needed to publicise them better. That’s where we got this idea.” The duo approached Roy, who put them in touch with Joint CP Sadanand Date, Law and Order. “We deliberately chose ordinary officers with whom the public would interact at police stations,” said Date.

The ads 
“Namaste, ladies. Do you know who my father is? You can’t even imagine what I’m capable of. You don’t know how well connected I am. Don’t be afraid of anyone who uses such phrases and misbehaves with you. Come to the police. No matter how well connected they are. We’ll connect them to jail…” says a silver mustachioed police officer in one of the  advertisements.

In another ad, PSI Vidya Kaldate addresses Mumbai’s women. “I know that you often tolerate harassment from men. You do not even complain against them, worrying how you will tell a male officer what someone said to you, or what a man did to you. That’s precisely why many women police officers like me are present at police stations, for your help and support. So don’t tolerate any harassment…”

Date also suggested shooting similar campaigns to create awareness within the force as well. These internal ad campaigns are played at over 150 city police stations every morning during roll call. They feature ordinary women, reminding cops that they depend on them for safety. “It will help our officers realise that merely registering an FIR is a great help,” said Date.

In another ad, Senior police inspector AR Shaikh of Malwani police station addresses the camera in four languages. “This is meant to counter the impression that police only pay heed to complainants who speak Marathi,” explains Karmakar. Shaikh was delighted to star in the ad. “It was a unique experience and I’m glad I did the advertisement. The message has gone out to women that we are here and ready to help them.”

In fact, it was Shaikh’s co-star senior police inspector (traffic), Rajendra Chauhan’s idea to feature traffic police as they end up being the first point of contact for victims of harassment.  As you cross the shopping district of SV Road Bandra, Deputy Commissioner of Police Harvinder Kaur Waraich, armed with a baton is seen on a billboard. “Ladies should never hesitate to approach the police. The main purpose of the campaign is public awareness. Working women know about policewomen, but housewives may be unaware.”

The ads clear another myth that the police are reluctant to take complaints. “Complaints do get registered and we wanted to bring that out. Every piece is simple and tackles a real fear in the quiet victim’s mind,” concludes Karmakar


Rajasthan: Student gangraped by sacked cops #Vaw

Jaipur, March 11, 2013


A 20-year-old girl was allegedly gangraped by two sacked jawans of Rajasthan Police Constabulary, police said in Jaipur.

“The girl was with her friend on a motorbike on March 7 when the accused, also on motorcycle, chased and stopped them near Rawatbhata road. The accused

identified as Mohan Singh and Jai Kumar, posing as policemen, sought papers of the motorbike and asked the couple to come to a police outpost with them saying that they were roaming in suspicious circumstances,” SHO Dadabadi police stationKota, Dharmendra Kumar said on Monday.

“The couple was forced to sit on Jai Kumar’s motorcycle, while Mohan Singh drove the boy’s bike to an isolated area where they beat the boy and took turns to rape the girl,” he said.

After the incident, the couple reported the matter to the police and an FIR was lodged.

Mohan Singh was arrested on Saturday, he said, adding he was sent to judicial custody till March 16.

Another accused Jai Kumar is still absconding and a hunt is on to arrest him, he said.

The girl was living in a rented accommodation in Kota city and attending medical coaching classes.

Both the accused, who are local residents, were the RAC jawans and they were terminated from the services in 2006 for their involvement in a robbery case, the SHO, who is the investigating officer, sai


#Punjabgangrape – Rape survivor battles to put pieces of life together #Vaw


Jupinderjit Singh/TNS

Bathinda, February 25
Four months ago, she was brutally raped by seven men who made a video-film on her and chopped off her hair.The 14-year-old, a class VIII student, has not had the courage to return to school since then. Her two younger siblings did not go to school for a month after the sordid incident. The victim’s family has decided to sell their small piece of land and migrate.

Across the village fields is the house of Manpreet Singh,22, the key accused. His father Gurjeet Singh, 54, and his elder brother Charanjeet Singh, 56, are co-accused in the case along with four others. Shinder Singh, 50, Gurjeet Singh’s brother, is the only one left at home to tend to the fields and the cattle. “Shoot us but don’t call my brothers and nephew rapists,” he says. Showing documents pertaining to a civil suit, Shinder Singh claimed: “We have been framed. The girl’s father had sold us a piece of land some years ago. When the price of the plot went up, he sought more money but we refused.”

An FIR was filed on October 20, 2012, alleging that Manpreet Singh and his friend Raju had forcibly taken the girl to a room 150 metres from her house and raped her . The victim’s further alleged that on October 14, the two called her up, asking her to meet them outside her house. They promised to delete the video-clip on her.

However, the two, who were accompanied by five others, took her away and raped her again. They cut off her hair and dumped her outside her house.

The Deputy Commmissioner said there was no scheme under which the victim could be rehabilitated. The Senior Superintendent of Police said the police had acted immediately on receiving the complaint and booked the accused.


  • Traumatised, she has not dared to return to school
  • Her two younger siblings did not go to school for a month
  • The family has decided to sell land and shift out



Guidelines to Police Officers Investigating cases under SC/ST (POA) ACT, 1989 & PCR ACT, 1955

Article 17 of the Constitution of India has abolished the practice of untouchability in all forms To give effect to this Article. Parliament enacted the Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 and later renamed it as The Protection of Civil Rights’ Act, 1955 and notified the Rules in 1977 to implement the Provisions of the Act Later, the Parliament passed the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 which enable the police authorities for taking specific measures to prevent the atrocities to carry out the provisions of this Act, the Government of India notified the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules in the year 1995. In view of the above, the Police Officers have been entrusted with the noble duty to implement all the provisions of the enactments and in right spirit. In this regard, certain measures which are needed to be taken by the Police Officers, who directly or indirectly deal with the incidents of atrocities or practice of untouchability in their respective jurisdiction are as under
1) To identify the atrocities prone areas / villages in order to enable themselves to take adequate preventing measures well in time.
2) They should visit the identified areas and review the Law and Order situation from time to time.
3) To cancel the Arms licenses of the persons who have misused a licensed firearms for committing atrocities or are likely to commit atrocities.
4) To organize Awareness Campaign in the identified areas to educate the SCs/STs about their rights and protections available to them under different enactments.
5) To deploy pickets in such identified areas, where there is an imminent danger of reprisal against SCs/ STs.
6) In extreme situations Arms licenses may be recommended to be issued to the SCs/ STs to enable them to protect their lives and properties.
7) Any complaint of atrocity on SCs/STs by forcing them to eat any inedible substance, causing insult or annoyance, parading them naked / with painted face, wrongful occupation / dispossession from their land, house etc.. forcing bonded labour, use of force in casting of vote, institution of false cases, intentional insult in public view, outraging modesty of SC/ST women, refusing access to a place of public resort, expelling SCs/STs from their houses / village etc. are covered under section 3 (1) of the SCs / STs (POA) Act Whereas, some of offences like fabricating false evidence, mischief by fire, attempt to cause disappearance of the evidence etc. for which the SC/ST person is likely to be convicted of an offence which is not capital but punishable with imprisonment of (07) years or upwards, would fall u/s 3(2) of the SCs/STs (POA) Act.
8) All the cases of atrocities on SCs/STs by non SCs and STs should be registered under the provisions of the SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 only, while the cases of enforcing any disability on account of preaching and practicing untouchability should be booked under the provisions of PCR Act. All the concerned officers should clearly understand the provisions of these two enactments and their applicability.
9) If any offence under sec. 3 of SCs/STs (POA) Act is committed by a public servant, he is liable to be prosecuted u/s 3(2) (VII).
10) On receipt of a representation / compliant pertaining to any offence under the provisions of thee SCs / STs (POA) Act either in writing or orally at the Police Station, the Officers -in-charge shall register a case, as provided under Rule 5(1) of the POA Rules of 1995 r/w 154 Cr.PC and if the Officer — in — charge of the Police Stations fails to do so, it amounts to “willful neglect of duty” which in itself is an offence u/s 4 of the said Act.
11) While registering FIR. it should be ensured that correct Sections and Sub Sections under the appropriate Act are applied Any attempt of burking or minimizing the gravity of the offence shall be treated as “Willful neglect of duty ”.
12) All the cases of bogus caste certificates should be booked u/s 420 IPC.
13) The lOs should refrain from becoming parties to the compromises / out of court settlements in cases of specific accusations as defined under the Acts.
14) All the Cases referred u/s 156 (3) Cr.PC. by the court should be promptly registered and the FIR copies should be sent to court and other concerned officers without any delay If there is any dereliction of duty on the part of the IO, he shall be liable for contempt of court and also for Departmental action
15) FIR copy in every case should be sent to the District Magistrate, to enable him to take decision regarding sanction of relief and rehabilitation measures and a copy of the FIR should also be given to the complainant.
16) FIR copy should also be sent to the CP/ SP promptly with a request to appoint the 10 at the earliest, to enable the 10 to commence investigation without any loss of time.
17) The Investigation Officer ACP/ DSP has to be appointed by the C.P / SsP. to expeditiously investigate the case booked under (POA) Act. 1989 as envisaged under Rule 7(1) of SCs/STs (POA) Rules of 1995. Non-compliance of the above legal requirement would vitiate the entire investigation.
18) Rule 7(2) stipulates that the investigating officer so appointed under sub-rule (1) shall complete the investigation on top priority basis within thirty days.
19) In case the appointed IO is transferred out, any another Dy SP is to be appointed as IO and it has to be done by issuing a fresh Appointment Order by S P/C P. U/Rule 7(1) of SC/ST (POA) Rules, 1995.
20) On receipt of the appointment order from the SP/C.P the appointed IO should take up investigation from the stage of FIR. If the initial investigation has been done by an incompetent officer, it is an irregular investigation and mere verification of such investigation by the Dy SP is void and irregular under the Law.
21) In case, the incompetent officer has filed the charge sheet after his investigation, it is null and void and hence the specially appointed Dy.SP should seek permission of the court by filling petition u/s 173(8)Cr.PC and proceed with further investigation from the initial stage i.e from the FIR stage after obtaining the permission of the Court.
22) Since, the investigation in cases under POA Act need to be completed within 30 days, the IO must ensure that the witnesses to be examined u/s 164 Cr.PC are examined within the stipulated period. Tendency to get 164 Cr.Pc statement done after months together should be put to an end. as such practice is found to be against the interest of the victim / complainant.
23) The lOs should refrain from getting the statements of witnesses recorded u/s 164 Cr.PC if it is likely to weaken the case of prosecution. As per established Law. such statements only should be got recorded u/s 164 Cr PC which are likely to strengthen the case.
24) In cases of bogus caste certificates, the IO should also invariably investigate into the conduct and character of the certificate issuing / inquiring authorities for heir prosecution if so required and write to the concerned department for initiating
departmental action against the accused officers, while furnishing the relevant material required to be relied upon by the appropriate authority.
25) The IO after recording the statements of witnesses u/s 161 Cr.PC must hand over a copy of the same to the concerned witnesses under acknowledgement on the original copy as it would help in ensuring the truthfulness of the statements and the witness may refer to the same prior to his examination in the court. It would also stop the IOs from doing table investigation and that too at his convenient time.
26) The lOs should not hesitate to arrest the accused promptly when they are likely to tamper with the evidence by way of threatening or winning over the witness or terrorise the complainant or they are likely to abscond etc. It should also be ensured that the non-arrest of the accused does not result into commission of series of offences against the victims. Hence, the timely arrest goes a long way in preventing the offence and to enthuse confidence in the victims and the community.
27) On knowing that Anticipatory Bail petition has been filed in the Sessions Court or High Court by the accused, the ID should immediately meet the concerned APP/SpI PP/ PP and apprise him of the facts of the case, to enable him to oppose the bail However, if the court entertains such petition, the lO/SpI PP/PP/ APP should rely upon Section 18 of SCs/STs (POA) Act.
28) The Investigation Officer should examine the important and relevant witnesses only, as that would help him to unearth the truth and complete the investigation within a period of 30 days.
29) It is noticed that some of the accused are getting counter cases registered against the SC/ST complainants. In this regard, the lOs must ensure that the investigation in both the cases is completed within 30 days and that the false case is closed Undue delays in this regard are viewed with suspicion by the public and victim in particular.
30) Adequate care should be taken by the IO to complete the investigation within the stipulated period i.e. 30 days and submit the report, lest on this ground the entire investigation may be held as null and void by the court being violation of Rule 7(2) of SCs/STs(POA) Rules.
31) In the cases booked against public servants, the concerned lOs should obtain permission of the Govt, to prosecute the accused u/s 197 Cr.PC before laying the charge sheet.
32) It is a well-established principle that the evidence of the complainant alone shall be sufficient for laying the charge sheet in the Court if it is capable of inspiring the confidence of the court The tendency to close the cases as False/MF, on the basis of the evidence of unimportant witnesses while ignoring the evidence of the complainant needs to be put to an end.
33) The IO must furnish the required number of copies of the relevant material to the accused and promptly produce the accused in the court to get the charges framed early in the designated Sessions Court.
34) In these cases, the IO must make an attempt to gather evidence to the effect that the accused were aware of the victim’s caste at the time of committing the offence,
35) After completion of investigation, the IO should file the charge sheet in the concerned ACJM Court for committal sake and not at all in the Special Court.
36) The lOs should send Memo of Evidence incorporating List of Documents, List of Material Objects and also List of Witnesses along with Charge Sheet and obtain acknowledgement for the same.
37) The IO should enclose injury reports, FSL Report, Medical opinion etc. along with the Charge Sheet while filing in the Court.
38) Any attempt on the part of the accused to threaten the witnesses or to tamper with the evidence etc. the IO should bring it to the notice of the Court and seek denial or cancellation of the bail as the case may be.
39) The IO should proceed u/s 82 & 83 Cr.PC against the sureties, where the accused are absconding and NBWs issued against them.
40) The IO should take prompt and effective steps in consultation with the PP to get the stays vacated by approaching the Superior Courts.
41) The Investigating Officer should produce the witnesses before the APPs for refreshing their memory before they are produced before the court The witnesses or whose 164 statements are already recorded must be warned of action u/s 193 IPC if they turn hostile in the court.
42) It the witnesses in attendance in courts are to be sent back without examination by the Court on the request or due to absence of the accused, the Prosecuting
Officers should insist on the examination of such witnesses or insist on payment of cost to the witnesses by the accused, as provided u/ Rule 11 of SCs/STs (POA) Rules. 1995.
43) The SsP must ensure that the District Magistrate do prepare a panel of Senior Advocates for conducting cases in the Special Courts as Spl PP and send the same to the Government to notification in the official gazette. The District Magistrate may also be requested to review the performance of the Special PP at least twice in a year and in case he has not conducted the cases with due care and caution, his name may be sent for de-notification.
44) The Commissioner of Police / Superintendents of Police Unit Officers may also recommend to the District Magistrate, if so desired by the victims, to engage an eminent Senior Advocate for conducting the cases in Special Court.
45) Summons on the Police Officers to give their evidence should be served promptly and it should be ensured by the supervisory officers that they do attend the Court to give their evidence.
46) Police should assist the Courts in bringing forward the witnesses / accused promptly to ensure smooth and expeditious trial of the case.
47) The dilatory tactics adopted by the accused should be effectively and honestly countered by way of formally opposing the applications for adjournments u/s 309 Cr.PC and also request the Court to go ahead with the trial as provided u/s 317 (1) Cr.PC.
48) The Commissioners of Police / Superintendents of Police should ensure that Special PPs are appointed in every Special Court meant for handling such cases.
49) The cases are getting abnormally delayed mainly due to non-attendance by the accused, non-attendance by the witnesses, lack of commitment on the part of the lOs / APP/Spl.PP/PP etc. It can be countered by formally opposing the exemption from attendance petitions and obtaining NBWs against such accused The lOs should also sincerely execute the NBWs / BWs against the accused and witnesses to ensure speedy trial and also to proceed u/s 82 and 83 Cr.PC against them if situation so warrants.
50) In cases where some of the accused are not attending the court for a long time, the IO/APP/Spl.PP/PP should get the case split up against the absconding accused, who are not likely to be arrested in near future. a$ provided u/s 317 (2) Cr PC.
51) Where there is no likelihood to secure the presence of the accused in near future after framing of the charges, the IO/APP/Spl.PP/PP should request the court to examine the witnesses u/s 299 Cr.PC.
52) The Commissioners of Police / Superintendents of Police must initiate appropriate disciplinary action against the lOs for the lapses pointed out in the Judgment and in cases of lapses on the part of Special PPs the same may be addressed to the District Magistrate / Director of Prosecutions / Ld Legal Remembrancer, Government of West Bengal.
53) The Commissioners of Police / Superintendents of Police West Bengal must actively liaise with the District Magistrate for effective functioning of District Vigilance & Monitoring Committee by way of causing critical review of cases for their expeditious disposal, organizing Awareness Campaigns, seeking involvement of NGOs review of relief and rehabilitation measures, formulation of Model Contingency Plans for preventing disputes and caste related social disturbances, etc.
54) The stringent provisions of the Act including neglect of duty by public servant, forfeiture of property, internment of persons from Scheduled and Tribal areas, imposition of collective fines, if judiciously implemented would create deterrent climate.
55) In all the acquittal cases, the judgment copies should be obtained from the court at the earliest to send the same to the concerned SP or Inspector General of Police-1, CID, West Bengal along with the opinion of APP/ Spl.PP/PP within (20) days for scrutiny and to enable them to take decision regarding filing an appeal or otherwise.
56) The Commissioners of Police / Superintendents of Police should personally review the Final Reports and take appropriate decision at their level keeping the following points in view among other things.
a) Whether the IO has explained the delay in lodging the complaint, if any
b) Whether the IO has examined all the eye witnesses specially those who have been cited in the complaint.
c) Whether the IO has collected the Caste Certificate of the complainant and accused
d) Whether valid appointment orders are placed in the CD file.
e) Whether opinion of the concerned A.P.P /Spl. PP/ PP has been obtained
f) Whether the Investigation Officer so appointed under Rule 7 (1) of SC/ST (POA) Rules, 1995 had completed the investigation on top priority within 30 days as required under Rule 7(2) of SC/ST (POA) Rules, 1995.
57) The District Superintendents of Police/ Commissioners of Police are requested to take action against any Police Officer u/s 4 of SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 who willfully neglects his duties required to be performed by him under this Act.
58) The copies of Judgments in all acquitted / convicted cases also should be sent to Inspector General of Police – I, CID, West Bengal.
The above instructions should be communicated to all the Officers — in — charge of Police Stations (including l/C’s) and Investigating Officers.
This issues with the approval of DGP, CID, West Bengal.

Addl. Director General of Police – ll,
CID, Bhawni Bhaban, Alipore
Kolkata- 700 027

Copy forwarded for information and necessary action to

1) All Superintendents of Police including SRPs. West Bengal
2) Commissioners of Police. Howrah and Assansole & Durgapore
3) DIG, Midnapur Range/Malda Range/Murshidabad Range/Railways.
4) Special IG and DIG. Presidency Range/Burdwan Range/Darjeeling Range/ Jalpaiguri Range
5) IGP, Western Zone / North Bengal / South Bengal / Railways

Addl. Director General of Police – ll,
CID, Bhawni Bhaban, Alipore
Kolkata- 700 027

Copy forwarded to DG & IGP, West Bengal, for Kind information.

Addl. Director General of Police-ll,
CID, Bhawni Bhaban, Alipore
Kolkata- 700 027



#Kerala Now, a Facebook ‘like’ leads to sedition charges #ITact #WTFnews

Jan 16, 2013, 04.13AM IST TNN[ Mahir Haneef ]

It is alleged that Ali clicked ‘like’ on a Facebook page titled ‘I Love Pakistan‘.
KOCHI: Clicking on the ‘like’ button on Facebook has landed K H Muhammed Ali, a native of Eloor and Dubai municipality employee, in deep trouble. He has been charged with sedition and insulting national honour.The only crime that Ali remembers doing is clicking ‘like’ on the Facebook profiles of friends, including a few Pakistanis, he earned in Dubai.Now, the Kochi police have booked him for sedition, sending offensive message (66A of Information Technology Act, 2000), and for insulting the national flag (section 2 of Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act, 1971).In the FIR filed in September 2012, it is alleged that Ali clicked ‘like’ on a Facebook page titled ‘I Love Pakistan’ and that a picture showing a dog clothed in the national flag was seen in his Facebook profile page.

On Tuesday, Ali filed a petition at the Kerala high court, through advocate K K Ashkar, challenging the FIR registered by the Eloor police.

Ali has contended in the petition that his Facebook account doesn’t bear the message ‘I Love Pakistan’, doesn’t have any pictures showing disrespect to the national flag, nor has sent any offensive message or pictures showing disrespect to the national flag.

He further pointed out that registering of FIR in cyber cases without a pre-investigation inquiry by an investigative agency with expertise in information technology is against the rules stipulated in the cyber crime investigation manual, the only such manual in India that was released by the Union home secretary.

After police registered the FIR alleging sedition, he and his family have been facing social stigma, Ali’s petition said. His family has been isolated by the local community and relatives and they are being treated like traitors. His wife and younger child have been traumatized by the ordeal, the petition stated.

Kochi city police commissioner arrived at a hypothetical inference that amounts to character assassination, the petitioner alleged.

The petitioner has cited the commissioner’s remark, which is extracted in the FIR, stating “as petitioner was working in UAE and his remark in the Facebook ‘I Love Pakistan’ and his close relation with Pakistanis in UAE may indulge in antisocial activities”. Such a casual statement prejudicially affects the liberty of the petitioner and has caused mental trauma, social ostracism, and persecution, it is alleged.



W.P.(C) No. 1436 of 2013

K.H. Muhammed Ali, aged 42 years,
S/o. Hameed,
Residing at Kanappilly House, Eloor North,
Udyogamandal – 6883501,
Now working at Dubai Municipality, Post Box No. 36701,
Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

Respondent/ Respondent:
1. State of Kerala,
Represented by the Chief Secretary,
Government of Kerala,

2. The Secretary, Dept. of Home Affairs,
Government of Kerala,
Thiruvananthapuram – 69500.

3. Sub Inspector of Police,
Eloor Police Station, Udyogamandal. P.O,
Pin- 683501.

4. Circle Inspector of Police,
Ernakulam Town, North Circle,

5. The District Police Chief,
Kochi City,

6. Sub Inspector of Police,
Cyber Crime Investigation Cell, Ernakulam


The Petitioner most respectfully submits as follows:

1. The petitioner herein is a Non Resident Indian citizen who has been working as welder at Dubai Municipality in United Arab Emirates since 21.01.2009. He has been in U.A.E since 27.07.2005 for earning daily bread for him and his family lives herein Eloor in Ernakulam district of Kerala. He is the sole bread winner of his family consisting of wife, aged and cardiac ailment suffered mother and two children aged 10 and 7 years. Petitioner is a believer of Communist ideology and was a member of CPI (M) and its youth wing DYFI and a sympathizer of Left Democratic Front. He was actively engaged in cultural and social activities and library movement in his home town Eloor prior to his emigration to UAE for employment. He was an office-bearer of the public library situated in Eloor. His family has the tradition of left sympathizers and patriotic secular social outlook. He had concern for ecology and environment, especially being a resident of Eloor, which was declared to be India’s 24th Critically Polluted industrial cluster by Ministry of Environment and Forest.
2. Petitioner’s family was residing in a rented house till 26.08.2012 on which date petitioner completed construction of his house in the property he inherited, at Eloor North. He found finance for the construction of his house having plinth area of 1250 Sq. feet by advancing home loan to the tone of Rs.10 lacs from State bank of Travancore,Udyogamandal and Rs.7 lacs from Dubai Islamic Bank. In the early week of July 2012, one police officer visited petitioner’s rented house in Eloor and enquired about petitioner’s job, salary, whereabouts and estimate cost of construction of his house and its source. It was told by the police that it is part of usual enquiry about the Non Resident Keralites who are employed abroad. But after that, policemen from Special Branch and Crime Branch used to visit petitioner’s house intermittently enquiring about the whereabouts of petitioner and his expected arrival in home. Petitioner’s mother who was a chronic patient suffering from cardiac ailments, had distress following the intermittent visit of policemen enquiring about the son who toils in the desert for livelihood. His wife and younger child has developed mental trauma. Thereafter one policeman from Special Branch contacted petitioner over phone from a cell no. 9497936163 and enquired about his job, construction of house and its source of finance and passport details. Petitioner insisted the policeman for the reason why he and his family has been repeatedly quizzed by the police and what wrong he has committed for persecuting him and his family and go through fear psychosis. Then he was told that Dy S.P of Police, Crime Branch CID, Ernakulam has received a complaint from Standing Council of Trade Unions, Ernakulam against Mr. Purushan Eloor and his organisation Periyar Malineekarana Virudha Samithi alleging link with anti national forces and some pictures showing disrespect to national flag and a message ‘I Love Pakistan’ were produced alleging to be taken from facebook account of the petitioner, describing to be the close friend of Purushan Eloor to buttress their allegation against him.
3. Petitioner has neither facebook account bearing message that “I Love Pakistan” and pictures showing disrespect to national flag of India nor sent any offensive message or pictures showing disrespect to national flag of India and national honor to anyone using internet or any communication devices. On 20.09.2012, the Sub Inspector of Police, Eloor (3rd respondent herein) registered Crime No. 923/2012 by lodging First Information Report against petitioner upon a complaint made by Kochi City District Police Chief (5th respondent herein) dated 10.09.2012 which is extracted in the 4th page of FIR. Certified copy of the First Information Report in Crime No.923/12 registered against the petitioner is produced herewith and marked for reference as Exhibit-P1. By Ext.P1, the offences registered against the petitioner are under section 124A IPC, section 66A, Information Technology Act and section 2 of Prevention of Insult to National Honour (PINH) Act.
4. It is a trite proposition that a person, who is named in FIR as an accused, suffers social stigma. If an innocent person is falsely implicated, he not only suffers from loss of reputation but also mental tension and his personal liberty is seriously impaired. After lodging Ext.P1 FIR, the petitioner’s family has been isolated by the local community and relatives, as so grievous offences are alleged against the petitioner like sedition and insult to national honour. Petitioner and his family have been treated like traitors and betrayers of nation by local public as petitioner has been named as accused in Ext.P3 with allegation of sedition. His wife and younger child has developed mental trauma. Information Technology Act, 2000 deals with crimes using computer and internet and computer related crimes, but it doesn’t prescribe the method and mode of cyber crime investigation which is still in nascent stage in India and widely abused by police by inadequate experience and knowledge in information technology and internet. There are divergent precedents regarding conducting preliminary enquiry before registering FIR by an investigation officer. But in cyber crimes, offences are committed on virtual cyber space, it not easy to identify the author only by the name reflected in the web as of real world crimes. Hence the manual of cyber crime investigations prepared by International Telecommunication Union and the only Cyber Crime Investigation Manual in India released by Home Secretary, Government of India being prepared by Data Security Council of India and NASSCOM, discuss about the necessity of a pre-investigation inquiry by an investigative agency having expertise in information technology, lest liberty and reputation of netizens and citizens would be under peril being foisted in false accusations.
5. The allegation against the petitioner in the complaint is based on mere surmises and conjectures and made in vague, casual and cavalier manner with grave accusations that may peril the liberty of the petitioner. Honorable Supreme Court admonished the investigative agencies in dealing with charges of sedition that graver the offence, greater should be the care taken so that the liberty of a citizen is not lightly interfered with. It is alleged in the complaint of the 5th respondent extracted in FIR that petitioner had remarked in his Facebook that one of his favorite messages is that “I Love Pakistan which has been seen from somebody’s facebook. As per the statement, 5th respondent has not seen such remark in petitioner’s facebook, but it was seen from somebody’s facebook. Who is the said somebody who has seen such remark in petitioner’s facebook is not mentioned. The 5th respondent went to the extent to arrive at a hypothetical inference that amount to character assassination of the petitioner that “as petitioner was working in UAE and his remark in the facebook “I Love Pakistan’ and his close relation with the Pakistanis in UAE may indulge in anti-social activities”. Without verifying whether such remarks appear in the facebook account of the petitioner and the facebook account alleged to have been seen from somebody’s facebook is really belonged to petitioner, by conducting a scientific and reliable preliminary inquiry by Cyber Crime Investigation Cell or any agency having expertise in investigation of crimes regarding information technology, and without inquiring and finding whether petitioner has close relationship with Pakistanis in UAE, how can a police officer who is none other than the chief of Kochi City Police, make such a comment in a casual and cavalier manner resulting in character assassination of petitioner and that too may prejudicially affect the liberty of the petitioner.
6. The honorable apex court upheld that it is the mandate of Art.21 which requires a police officer to protect a citizen from baseless allegations. The scheme of the Criminal Procedure Code is that after the police officer records an FIR under section 154 Cr.PC, he has to proceed to investigate under section 156 Cr.P.C and while investigating, the police officer has power to arrest under section 41. As two of the offences lodged against the petitioner are non bailable offences and of grievous character such as sedition and insult to national flag, the personal liberty of the petitioner would be at casualty. The 3rd respondent arbitrarily lodged FIR against the petitioner mechanically on the direction from his superior officer to register a case and without applying mind whether the allegations in the complaint of 5th respondent even if it taken its face value make out offences leveled against the petitioner. In this state, there is a specially trained police wing having expertise in information technology, namely Cyber Crime Enquiry Cell to investigate into cyber crimes. The action of the 5th respondent is highly arbitrary to direct the 3rd respondent to register case against the petitioner involving offence under Information Technology without referring it to the Cyber Crime Enquiry Cell.
7. It is learnt that 5th respondent made the said complaint directing the 3rd respondent to register case against the petitioner relying on the facebook pages showing remark “I Love Pakistan” and pictures showing disrespect to national flag produced by Standing Council of Trade Unions, Ernakulam alleging to be taken from petitioner’s facebook account and treating the same as gospel of truth. Petitioner has no facebook account bearing such message and pictures showing disrespect to national flag and in the facebook account that petitioner holds, trade union standing council or its members are not in the friends’ list to access his facebook account, hence the act is punishable under section 43 (a) & (b) read with section 66 of Information technology Act. Section 156 of the Code empowers the 3rd respondent to investigate cognizable case and section 41 empowers to arrest any person who has been concerned in any cognizable offence or agisnst whom reasonable complaint has been made. All three offences leveled against the petitioner are cognizable offences and two of them are non bailable offences. As the actions of the police including 3rd and 5th respondents showing mechanical proceeding with the case, it is likely to be proceeded with investigation of Ext.P3 and on that instance petitioner would be deprived of his liberty.
8. On 18.11.2012, The Hindu reported about a delegation led by Prakash Karat, General Secretary of the CPI(M) delegation to meet President Shri Pranab Mukherjee regarding targeting and persecution of scores of Muslim youth in terrorism related cases. The delegation made memorandum expressing their strong exception and anger thus”
“Grave miscarriage of justice to scores of Muslim youth who were and are being wrongly arrested and charged in cases related to terror attacks in different parts of the country. In some cases, these young men have been incarcerated for ten to fourteen years as undertrials and then finally acquitted by the courts as being innocent. Several reliable groups of concerned citizens and organizations who have collected the details of these cases, have revealed how the court judgements themselves have strongly indicted the investigation agencies for the biased mentality against the Muslim youth and in several cases the manipulation and presentation of concocted evidence against innocent young men. It would appear that the investigation agencies are more driven by the requirement to show “results” in their investigation rather than to ensure that it is the actual culprits who are caught.
Muslim youth are the most vulnerable targets today. The draconian provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act are used to deny the normal processes of justice, while there is no time bound procedure for the judicial processes. There is a growing feeling of fear and apprehension on the one hand and anger on the other that innocents are being implicated. Young lives have been destroyed, families stricken, forced into social isolation, driven into debt to pay the huge expenditures in legal fees —the terrible conditions caused by State led injustice.
As an illustration, the cases of the four young men Md. Aamir from Delhi, Syed Maqbool from Srinagar, Wasif Haider and Mumtaz Ahmed from Uttar Pradesh are presented before you. They were arrested arbitrarily when they were just eighteen or nineteen years of age, implicated in dozens of cases, incarcerated for over ten years and each one of them was, as held by the courts, innocent. They are today without jobs, considered unemployable, with dark and uncertain futures.
While no quarter can be given to any individual or group which is responsible for dastardly terror attacks, the arrest of innocent Muslim youth has reached serious dimensions which require immediate attention. It is a blot on the principles of secular democracy. At the same time, the arrest of innocent people means that the actual culprits go free.—the terrible conditions caused by State led injustice.
9. The 5th respondent made fanciful allegation merely based on hypothetical deductive thinking that may snatch away the liberty and reputation of an innocent citizen like petitioner. Petitioner has no facebook account having remark that “I Love Pakistan” is his favorite messages and pictures showing disrespect to National flag. Petitioner has reasonable apprehension that he has been tagged to be a scapegoat only because his name reflects a religious identity against which investigative agency has prejudice. It is learnt that 5th respondent made such complaint upon pictures produced by the Standing Council of Trade Unions Ernakulam in order to wreck vengeance with environmental activists and to indict them with accusation of link with anti national forces. If the police officer would register FIR without application of mind on any such seditious pictures alleged to be taken from the facebook account of someone, without verifying the authenticity and author of such online postings by a duly enquiry and procedure applying information technology by a specially trained police like Cyber Crime Enquiry Cell or any other agency having expertise in information technology, liberty and freedom of citizen would be at jeopardy and our republic made on Socialist, Secular and democratic pillars would slip into one made on the peels of banana.
10. As well discussed by honorable apex court in Lalita Kumari & others v. Govt. of U.P & others, 2012 (4) SCC 1 and in series of many other judgments, recording of FIR is not an empty formality upon receiving a complaint. In the petitioner’s case, Ext.P1 FIR has been lodged against him alleging offences of sedition, insult to national honour and sending offensive message under Information Technology Act. The allegation of all offences was based on his alleged postings in his facebook account claimed to be seen by somebody. For proving the accusation that it has to be verified whether the original counterpart of the printout produced before the police by somebody really exist in facebook, the online social networking website. And if it really exists in facebook, it has to be ascertained from which e-mail account that facebook profile was logged in and that the IP address of the computer by which such impugned postings and pictures were made in the facebook profile and that whether petitioner is the custodian or owner of the computer having that IP address and e-mail ID. For these enquiry and findings it requires an investigative agency like Cyber Crime Investigation cell having trained expertise in Information Technology and it requires much correspondence with Facebook, the e-mail service provider with which facebook was used to log in, the internet service provider, foreign government, if the computer system situates in another country. In normal practice it requires 6 to 10 months to complete this preliminary enquiry. But the respondents avoid the said pre-investigation enquiry applying information technology before registering Ext.P1 against petitioner. After registering FIR, the crime was forwarded to Circle Inspector, Ernakulam Town North Circle (4th respondent herein) for investigation. It is learnt that 4th respondent sought pictures in the facebook account of the petitioner from Cyber Crime Enquiry Cell, Ernakulam (6th respondent herein) on 22.09.2012. After that scientific cyber crime enquiry, if it’s found that impugned postings and pictures are not created by petitioner in his facebook profile, how the mental trauma, social ostracism and persecution suffered by petitioner and his family by being named as accused in a FIR of grave crime like sedition, would be made good by the police and the state? If petitioner is arrested and detained in the meanwhile during the said cyber crime enquiry is pending, how its consequential loss of his reputation, liberty and livelihood will be compensated by the state and police? Whether the police would be satisfied in throwing petitioner and his family to street of disrepute and penury?
11. Anyone can create any number of facebook profile by any name, even though terms and conditions of facebook user agreement restricts creating account for anyone other than the user and creating of more than one personal account. There exist more than 50 facebook profiles in the name of the opposition leader Sri.V.S. Achuthanandan and more than 10 facebook profiles exist in the name of the Chief Minister Sri. Oommen Chandy. It is not sure whether all accounts or any of the accounts were created by them. If one make a complaint that one of the facebook profile bearing the name of Chief Minister or Opposition Leader contains some seditious post or photos and produces a printout of the same before the police, whether the police officer would mechanically register FIR against Chief Minister or Opposition Leader alleging offence of sedition. If such FIR is lodged what would be its results, newspapers and Televisions screens across the country will flash with scrolling news of them being named as accused. If the investigation officer is having a prudent mind he would not register FIR on such complaint as it would have unforeseen ramification to the liberty and reputation of the person alleged with the offence as the allegations are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. The police were discriminatory in their action against petitioner in lodging Ext.P1 denying the petitioner equality before law violating Art.14 of the Constitution of India.
12. The 3rd respondent lodged FIR against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under sections 124A of Indian Penal Code, 66A of Information Technology Act and 2 of Prevention of Insult to National Honour Act. The contents of the FIR is thus:
“dÉÄß §LcX ØßxßØY ¦ÏßøßæA ¿ßÏÞæa çËØíÌáAßW §LcX çÆÖàÏ ÉÄÞµæÏ ¥ÉÎÞÈßAáK ÄøJßW ¥ÕçÙ{ȺßdÄ¢ dÉÆVÖßMߺîᢠ“I Love Pakistan” ®KÄÞÃí Äæa §×í¿æMG ØçwÖæÎKᢠµÞÃߺîí çËØíÌáAßW çø¶æM¿áJßÏᢠÎxᢠæºÏñí dÉÄß çÆÖÕßøái ÕßµÞø¢ dɵ¿ßMߺîᢠ¥Äí ÎxáUÕVAí dÉçºÞÆÈ¢ ÈÜíµÃæÎKâU ©çgÖçJ޿ᢠµøáÄçÜ޿ᢠµâ¿à dÉÕVJßºî µÞøc¢.”
13. It can be seen that the 3rd respondent lodged FIR without seeing and verifying the facebook account of the petitioner and the pictures showing disrespect to national flag alleged to be created by petitioner in his facebook account, but mechanically upon the direction of the 5th respondent. The allegations in the complaint of 5th respondent upon which Ext.P1 FIR has been lodged are vague and cryptic on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner. The pictures and remarks alleged to be made in the facebook account of the petitioner are referred to in the complaint to indict the petitioner of the offences alleged in Ext.P1 were stated to seen from the face book account of somebody. It is not stated who is the said somebody who has seen impugned objectionable pictures in petitioner’s facebook account and brought the attention of the police to the alleged offence. The whole allegation in the complaint is based on an indirect hearsay. The act of the 3rd and 5th respondent is highly arbitrary to proceed against the petitioner on mere hearsay and that too alleging grave offence which attracts social isolation, chance of loss of liberty and ill-repute to the petitioner as a consequence to be named as accused in a FIR of such offences.
14. Petitioner refutes the entire allegation of the complaint and FIR as he has no facebook account bearing remarks that “I love Pakistan” is his favorite message and pictures showing disrespect to national flag. Despite it, even if the allegations are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the petitioner. One of the offences alleged in the FIR is section 66A of Information Technology Act, 2000. The basic ingredient of section 66 A of the Act is sending of an information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character or that is false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, hatred etc. or sending of any electronic mail or message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages. There is no allegation in the FIR or its relying complaint that petitioner has sent impugned remarks or pictures to anyone by means of computer resource or communication device. The only accusation is that petitioner remarked in his facebook account that his favourite message is “I Love Pakistan” and two photographs showing disrespect to National flag were created in his facebook. There is no act of sending of alleged offensive remark or pictures by the petitioner to anyone. As per Ext.P3 FIR, somebody has seen the impugned remarks and pictures in petitioner’s facebook and there is no case that the said anonymous viewer was invited by the petitioner or he accessed the facebook account of the petitioner with his permission otherwise such unauthorised access is punishable under section 66 read with 43 (a) & (b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. If the allegations in the FIR taken on its face value, as the petitioner has not send the offensive remark and picture to anyone, it will not attract the ingredients of section 66A of Information Technology Act, hence it is liable to be quashed.
15. Another offence alleged against the petitioner in Ext.P3 is section 124A of Indian Penal Code. Honourable Supreme Court defined the meaning, scope and object of sedition under section 124A in Nazir Khan And Others v. State of Delhi, 2003 (8) SCC 461. “Sedition in itself is a comprehensive term, and it embraces all those practices, whether by word, deed, or writing, which are calculated to disturb the tranquillity of the State, and lead ignorant persons to endeavour to subvert the Government and laws of the country. The objects of sedition generally are to induce discontent and insurrection, and stir up opposition to the Government, and bring the administration of justice into contempt; and the very tendency of sedition is to incite the people to insurrection and rebellion. “Sedition has been described as disloyalty in action, and the law considers as sedition all those practices which have for their object to excite discontent or dissatisfaction, to create public disturbance, or to lead to civil war; to bring into hatred or contempt the Sovereign or the Government, the laws or constitutions of the realm, and generally all endeavours to promote public disorder. The decisive ingredient for establishing the offence of Sedition under S.124A, IPC is the doing of certain acts which would bring the Government established by law in India into hatred or contempt etc. In this case, there is not even a suggestion that appellant did anything as against the Government of India or any other Government of the State. The allegations made against the appellant contain no averment that appellant did anything as against the Government, hence it is liable to be quashed.
16. Another offence leveled against the petitioner in Ext.P3 is section 2 of Prevention of Insult to National Honour (PINH) Act, 1971. Section 2 states that “Whoever in any public place or in any other place within public view burns, mutilates, defaces, defiles, disfigures, destroys, tramples upon or otherwise shows disrespect to or brings into contempt whether by words, either spoken or written, or by acts) the Indian National Flag or the Constitution of India or any part thereof, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. The allegations in the FIR are so vague and cryptic to attract the ingredients of the said offence. Petitioner’s account in the domain of facebook is not a public space. The complaint of the 5th respondent upon which Ext.P3 FIR has been lodged states only that the other pictures crerated in the facebook are also showing disrespect to the National Flag of India. Petitioner’s account in the domain of facebook is not a public space. It states nothing about the picture and how it shows disrespect to national flag. By the allegations made in the FIR are patently absurd and by that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner under section 2 of PINH Act.
17. It is learnt that lodging of Ext.P1 FIR arose from the complaint made by Standing Council of Trade Unions, Ernakulam before DySP, CB CID, Ernakulam, to wreck their vengeance with environmental activist like Mr.Purushan Eloor and other members of Periyar Malineekarana Virudha Samithi. The Trade Union leaders produced the printout of facebook pages containing impugned remarks that I Love Pakistan is a favourite message and pictures showing disrespect to national flag to buttress their allegation against Purushan Eloor and others alleging link with anti national forces. On 23.07.2012 Mr.Purushan Eloor was quizzed by the DySP, CB CID, Ernakulam on the said complaint and sought his explanation on the produced facebook pages alleging disrespect to national flag. As he has not found such pictures and remarks showing disrespect to national flag and honour in his facebook account or of the petitioner, he made an application under RTI act for copies of the facebook pages produced by them for making complaint before Cyber Crime Enquiry Cell, but which was denied stating that RTI Act does not apply to Crime Branch CID. Then Purushan Eloor made a complaint before the DySP, CB CID, Ernakulam on 01.08.2012 seeking investigation against the Trade Union leaders for fabrication of false evidence after verifying the authenticity of impugned facebook pages produced by them. Two ministers of state government, namely Minister for Public Works and minister for Fisheries, Ports and Excise decorate the patrons’ post of Standing Council of Trade Unions, Ernakulam in violation to the mandate of section 22(3) of the Trade Union Act. Thus the trade union standing council has good access and influence in the state government. Ext.P1 was hastily lodged by the police malafidely to shun away the investigation sought against the Trade Union Standing Council, despite no FIR has been lodged on the complaint made by Purushan much earlier on 01.08.2012. Ext.P1 is liable to be quashed as the proceedings seem to have been initiated with mala fides/malice for wrecking vengeance or to cause harm to environmental activist like Purushan Eloor and others and for which petitioner has been made a scapegoat.
18. Petitioner’s mother is aged and sick having cardiac ailment. After the spreading out of news about the lodging of Ext.P1 against the petitioner, neighbors and relatives used to avoid social contact with petitioner’s family. This social ostracism and absence of petitioner who toils abroad for winning daily bread at deserts in Gulf and his unavailability of petitioner in her immediate presence, broke her. She wants to see the petitioner. Petitioner’s wife and children are also panic and longing for seeing him. Petitioner would get only short leave and he want to see his old mother, wife and children to pacify them, but he apprehends that his liberty would be periled being arrested by police who are arbitrarily proceeding with the false complaint initiated on the vengeance of a group of trade union leaders and on that instance he would lose his employment and means to repay the loan of Rs.17 lacs and subsistence for family and they may be finally dragged to street.
19. Petitioner is ready to face any investigation, but it should be free and fair. Petitioner crave before this honourable court until it has been found by the Cyber Crime Enquiry Cell that petitioner’s facebook account contains objectionable remarks and pictures showing disrespect to national flag or national or honour or of any seditious character, his personal liberty should not be curtailed. If it is found by the cyber crime inquiry cell that petitioner has made offensive and seditious remarks or pictures, petitioner bind himself before the investigative officer or the court to uphold the majesty of law. Petitioner apprehends that by the influence of Standing Council of Trade Union who has easy access and influence in government, he might have been made a scapegoat by the police for the feud of Trade Union Leaders against petitioner. If it is found in the inquiry that petitioner has not made such seditious remark and pictures in his facebook account, it will boomerang to the Trade Union Leaders indicting them of fabricating false evidence. In this circumstance there will be great pressure on investigating agency and cyber crime enquiry cell to get tailor made report by the Trade Union Leaders, the hasty lodging Ext.P1 reflects nothing different of petitioner’s apprehension. Hence the investigation and cyber crime enquiry should be under the guidance of this honorable court .
By the arbitrary and capricious action of the police, the reputation, life and personal liberty of the petitioner is under serious threat, petitioner having left with no other alternate efficacious remedy is compelled to approach this Honourable Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, on following among other
A) The 3rd respondent malafidely without application of mind lodged Ext.P1 FIR on the direction of 5th respondent without satisfying whether allegations made in the complaint even if taken on its face value, makes out any offence alleged.
B) Ext.P1 was lodged on a vague and cryptic complaint which has the character of only hearsay. It is liable to be quashed.
C) The allegations in the complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner.
D) In enquiry of cyber crimes, a pre-investigation enquiry of the authenticity and author of computer by which cyber crime has been committed is indispensable to proceed with the investigation. But police were malafidely haste to register Ext.P1 without verifying the authenticity and author of the impugned facebook pages. The action of the police was arbitrary and discriminatory and Ext.P1 liable to be quashed.
E) Even if the allegations in the FIR is taken its face value, it does not make out the offences under sections 66A, IT Act, 124A IPC, 2 PINH Act. Hence it is liable to be quashed.
F) Ext.P1 originally arose from the complaint of Trade Union Standing Council against one Mr. Pursuhan Eloor and the environmental organization he is associated with alleging link with anti national forces. For buttressing the said allegation they have produced the facebook pages which also contained the seditious remark and pictures alleged to be taken from petitioner’s face book account alleging that Purushan Eloor is petitioner’s close friend. It was with intention to wreck vengeance with environmental activist like Purushan Eloor. Purushan Eloor made a complaint against Trade union leaders seeking inquiry about the authenticity and authorship of the facebook pages which contain seditious pictures by referring to Cyber Cell and prosecute them alleging that it has been fabricated by the Trade Union leadership. Patron posts of the Standing Council of Trade Union is decorated by two ministers of state government in violation to the mandate of section 22 (3) of Trade Union Act. Trade Union standing council has easy access and influence in the state government. If it is found in the cyber crime inquiry that petitioner has not made such seditious remark and pictures in his facebook account, it will boomerang to the Trade Union Leaders indicting them of fabricating false evidence. In this circumstance there will be great pressure on investigating agency and cyber crime enquiry cell to get tailor made report by the Trade Union Leaders, the hasty lodging Ext.P1 reflects nothing different of petitioner’s apprehension. Hence the investigation and cyber crime enquiry should be under the guidance of this honorable court.
G) The mandate of Art.21 which requires a police officer to protect a citizen from baseless allegations. The respondent police officer arbitrarily and hastily proceeded with the allegation without verifying whether it is reliable or baseless. The life and liberty guaranteed under Art.21 is under peril by discriminatory treatment of Police by violating Art.14 of the Constitution of India.
For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:
i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P1 First Information Report lodged by the 3rd respondent upon the direction of the 5th respondent ;
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 4th respondent investigation officer not to arrest the petitioner until the receipt of report from Cyber Crime Enquiry Cell that confirms the allegations in the complaint;
iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 4th respondent investigation officer and 6th respondent to conduct investigation and cyber crime inquiry under the guidance of this Honourable High Court;
iv) Call for the information from the 5th respondent to make complaint against the petitioner and the supporting documents to make serious seditious allegation against the petitioner
Dated this the day of January, 2013.

Counsel for the Petitioners


For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit and in the Memorandum of Writ Petition, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Ext.P1 First Information Report, pending disposal of this writ petition.

Dated this the day of January, 2013.



Previous Older Entries


Kractivism-Gonaimate Videos

Protest to Arrest

Faking Democracy- Free Irom Sharmila Now

Faking Democracy- Repression Anti- Nuke activists


Kamayaninumerouno – Youtube Channel


Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,225 other followers

Top Rated

Blog Stats

  • 1,860,444 hits


September 2022
%d bloggers like this: