Allegations based
on status of poverty and human rights via
“354 me band kara
dungi”
It was evening of Jan 11,
2019. I was enjoying tea with my two friends in the canteen of the Indian Law
Institute, New Delhi. Two ladies (a mother and a daughter who seems to be an
advocate) rushed to the canteen inquiring about their mobile phone. They
alleged that while they were taking lunch, cleaning staff of canteen has taken
the mobile phone while collecting the used plates and glass from the table. They
were very much worried and agitated which was obvious. They were asking the
canteen employee to return the cell phone and indicating that they can find it easily
because of some influential source. I, with my friends requested them to cool
down and make a call on the number. The young advocate made a call and showed
me that the number is still ringing. We noticed that the call is responding
some were because we could hear the ring of a phone. Suddenly she found that the
cell phone was placed on the seat of the chair where they were taking lunch. They
seemed happy but were not in a mood to accept the fault on their side. Now the
owner of canteen came and asked her that why did she allege the canteen staff that
they have stolen it. There were a few exchange of words of allegations against each
other. We again requested them to leave the matter as the cell phone was
recovered. The young lawyer asked her mother to leave the premise and the
mother left the canteen. The young lady lawyer was in adamant to engage in
verbal fight. Now she also started speaking in English, “don’t talk to me loud”
etc. As we were there we can say that the canteen owner did expressed his loud displeasure
on the allegation of taking away mobile phone while collecting used utensils,
he did not speak anything which was objectionable. The lady lawyer left the
canteen with the last sentence which was height of her unruly behaviour. She told
“ 354 me band kara dungi.” Though my friends and canteen owner could not realise
immediately what it meant, I could easily understand it. (Section 354 of IPC deals
with “Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty” which
has been amended in 2013 with enhanced penalty. CrPC 1973 was also amended and special
procedure for registration of FIR by a lady police officer has been made and non
registration of FIR under section 354 is an offence under section 166A of IPC).
Canteen staff was advised that he should call 100 and inform that a lady has
threatened like this. The police came and they also met me in my chamber. The
story was narrated to the police officer. One diploma student of the Indian Law
Institute, who was also a lawyer commented that that a few persons like her are
bringing disrepute to the noble profession of Bar.
The misuse of law has
emerged as a necessary evil. While there is no denying that special laws and procedure
is essential to protect the cause of gender justice, it is equally important that
the misuse of laws be “nipped in its bud.” Such misuse are no more in margins and
cannot be avoided as a number of high courts and a few Supreme Court judgements
indicate (specially in sexual assault cases). The human rights movement to
promote the cause of gender justice through criminal laws will lose its vigour
if the misuse of laws by female remain unaddressed. I have also witnessed that various
distinguished scholars and feminist authors are not willing to accept this fact
as serious enough and they either feel the misuse does not exist or it is media
projection or overrating the problem or even normalising such instances. The
reaction of esteemed woman organisations on Arnesh
Kumar judgement or Rajesh Sharma judgement
also reflects the scenario. This comment is not based on one incident at
canteen and not a generalisation. This feeling is based on certain judicial decisions
which categorically admitted the misuse. News papers do cover similar items indicating
abuse of female related laws almost every month. This feeling is also based on interaction
with police and judicial officers. A dissertation of the Indian Law Institute submitted
under this author also form the foundation of this feeling. However, this
feeling is yet to be a research finding. Misuse of any law (especially those which
deal with half of the population of country) is a big hurdle in the march of gender
justice movement to protect, promote and preserve the human rights of woman.
This leads me to two observations. One, researchers need to focus on this
aspect to dispassionately examine whether such abuse is really serious to take
note of. Or is such instance of abuse avoidable as a part of necessary evil of
any criminal law. They should suggest socio-legal measures to check this
growing tendency, if it is really acute. Two, it is very easy to allege especially when
a poor and weak person is involved. The status of poverty or being needy (financially)
makes a person (a daily wager, a labour, a canteen staff, a security guard, a
driver, a domestic servant, a cleaning staff, a beggar etc) an easy prey of our
judgement accusation based on fictional thinking and classical presumption that
crimes are generally “caused by poverty or by personal and social
characteristics believed to be associated statistically with poverty, including
feeblemindedness, psychopathic deviations, slum neighbourhoods, and
deteriorated families” which was refuted by Sutherland. The allegations and accusations
on someone because of a person’s status of poverty or being in lower income
group is a gross human rights violations by those similar to non state actors.
