Friday, January 31, 2014

CONCLUSION 172nd Report of the Law Commission India

CONCLUSION
172nd Report of the Law Commission India


 7.1.   On  the  basis of the discussions contained in the preceding chapters, the Commission is  of  the  considered opinion  that  the following amendments need to be carried out in the Indian Penal Code, 1860; the Code  of  Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
7.2.   Changes recommended in the Indian Penal Code, 1860

7.2.1. Substitution  of  existing  section 375 of the IPC recommended.- The existing section 375 be  substituted  by the following:

"375.  Sexual Assault:  Sexual assault means –
a)   penetrating the vagina (which term  shall  include the  labia  majora),  the  anus  or urethra of any person with –i).   any part of the body of another person or ii).  an  object  manipulated  by another person except where such penetration is carried  out  for proper hygienic or medical purposes;
b)   manipulating any  part  of  the  body  of  another person  so  as  to cause penetration of the vagina (which term shall include the labia  majora),  the anus or the urethra of the offender by any part of the other person's body;
c)   introducing any part of the penis of a person into the mouth of another person;
d)   engaging in cunnilingus or fellatio; or
e)   continuing  sexual  assault  as defined in clauses (a) to (d) above in circumstances falling  under  any  of  the  six following descriptions:
First- Against the other person's will.
Secondly- Without the other person's consent.
Thirdly- With the other person's consent when such consent  has been obtained by putting such other person or any person in whom such other  person  is  interested,  in fear of death or hurt.
Fourthly- Where the other person is a female, with her consent, when the man knows that he is not the husband of such other person and that her consent is given because she  believes that the offender is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
Fifthly- With the consent  of  the  other  person, when,  at  the  time  of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the  administration by  the  offender  personally  or  through  another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, the other  person  is unable  to  understand the nature and consequences of that to which such other person gives consent.
Sixthly-  With  or  without  the  other   person's consent,  when such other person is under sixteen years of age.
Explanation:  Penetration to any extent is penetration for the purposes of this section.
Exception:  Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under sixteen  years  of  age,  is  not sexual assault."
Further we are not satisfied  that  the  Exception should be deleted.
                       (paragraphs 3.1.2 and 3.1.2.1, supra)

7.2.2. Recasting  of section 376 of the IPC recommended.-Section 376 shall be recast as follows:
"376.  Punishment  for  sexual  assault  -
(1)  Whoever, except  in  the  cases  provided  for  by sub-section (2), commits sexual assault shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not  be  less than  seven  years but which may be for life or for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable  to fine  unless the person subjected to sexual assault is his own wife and is not under sixteen years of age,  in  which case,  he  shall  be  punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
If the sexual assault is committed by a person  in a  position  of  trust  or  authority  towards  the personassaulted or by a near relative of the  person  assaulted, he/she  shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which  may extend  to  life  imprisonment and shall also be liable to fine.
Provided  that  the  court  may,  for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose  a sentence  of  imprisonment for a term of less than minimum punishment prescribed in this sub-section.
(2) Whoever,-
(a) being a police officer commits sexual assault-
(i) within the limits of  the  police  station  to which he is appointed; or
(ii) in the premises of any station house whether or not situated in the  police  station  to  which  he  is appointed; or
(iii) on a person in his custody or in the custody of a police officer subordinate to him; or
(b) being a public servant, takes advantage of his official position and commits sexual assault on  a  person in his custody as such public servant or in the custody of a public servant subordinate to him; or
(c) being on the management or on the staff  of  a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or  under  any  law  for  the  time being in force or of a women's or children's institution takes advantage  of  his official position and commits sexual assault on any inmate of such jail, remand home, place or institution; or
(d)  being  on the management or on the staff of a hospital, takes advantage of  his  official  position  and commits sexual assault on a person in that hospital; or
(e)  commits sexual assault on a woman knowing her to be pregnant; or
(f) commits sexual assault on a person  when  such person is under sixteen years of age; or
(g) commits gang sexual assault, shall  be  punished  with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but  which  may  be for life and shall also be liable to fine :
Provided  that  the  court  may,  for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose  a sentence  of imprisonment of either description for a term of less than ten years.
Explanation 1.- Where a  person  is  subjected  to  sexual assault  by  one  or  more in a group of persons acting in furtherance of their common intention, each of the persons shall be deemed to  have  committed  gang  sexual  assault within the meaning of this sub-section.
Explanation  2.- "Women's or children's institution" means an institution, whether called an orphanage or a home  for neglected  women  or  children  or  a  widows'  home or an institution called by any other name, which is established and maintained for the reception  and  care  of  women  or children.
Explanation 3.- "Hospital"  means  the  precincts  of  the hospital and includes the precincts of any institution for the    reception   and   treatment   of   persons   during convalescence or of persons requiring medical attention or
rehabilitation."
                               (paragraph 3.2.3, supra)
7.2.3. Modification   in   section   376A   of   the  IPC recommended.- Section 376A shall read as follows:
"376A. Sexual assault by the husband upon his wife during separation.- Whoever commits sexual assault upon his wife, who is living  separately  from  him  under  a  decree  of separation  or  under  any  custom  or  usage, without her consent, shall be punished  with  imprisonment  of  either description  for  a  term which shall not be less than two years and which may extend to seven years and  shall  also be liable to fine."
                               (paragraph 3.3.1, supra)
7.2.4. Amendment of sections 376B,  376C  and  376D.-  We recommend  enhancement  of  punishment  -  with  a minimum punishment of not less than five  years.    We  have  also added  an  Explanation  which  will govern all these three sections.  The Explanation defines "sexual intercourse" to mean any of the acts mentioned in clauses (a)  to  (e)  of section 375.    Explanation  to  section  375 will however apply even in the case of sexual intercourse as defined by the Explanation to this section.
Accordingly,  the modified sections 376B, 376C and 376D of the IPC shall read as follows:
"376B. Sexual intercourse by public servant  with  person in  his  custody.-  Whoever, being a public servant, takes advantage of his/her  official  position  and  induces  or  seduces  any  person,  who  is  in his/her custody as such  public servant or in  the  custody  of  a  public  servant subordinate  to  him,  to  have  sexual  intercourse  with him/her, such sexual  intercourse  not  amounting  to  the offence   of   sexual  assault,  shall  be  punished  with  imprisonment of either description for a term which  shall not  be  less  than five years and which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.
Provided that the  court  may,  for  adequate  and special  reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a  term  of  less  than  five years.
Explanation:   "Sexual  intercourse"  in  this section and sections  376C  and  376D  shall  mean  any  of  the  acts mentioned   in   clauses   (a)  to  (e)  of  section  375.
Explanation to section 375 shall also be applicable."
"376C. Sexual  intercourse  by  superintendent  of  jail, remand  home,  etc.-  Whoever, being the superintendent or manager of a jail, remand home or other place  of  custody established  by  or  under  any  law for the time being in force or of a  women's  or  children's  institution  takes advantage  of  his/her  official  position  and induces or seduces any inmate of such jail,  remand  home,  place  or institution  to have sexual intercourse with him/her, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of  sexual  assault,  shall  be  punished  with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less  than  five years  and which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.
Provided that the  court  may,  for  adequate  and special  reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a  term  of  less  than  five years.
Explanation  1.-  "Superintendent"  in relation to a jail, remand home or other place of  custody  or  a  women's  or children's institution includes a person holding any other office  in such jail, remand home, place or institution by virtue of which  he/she  can  exercise  any  authority  or control over its inmates.
Explanation  2.-  The  expression  "women's  or children's institution" shall have the same meaning as in Explanation 2 to sub-section (2) of section 376.
376D.  Sexual intercourse by any member of the management or  staff  of a hospital with any woman in that hospital.- Whoever, being on the management of a hospital or being on the  staff  of  a  hospital  takes  advantage  of  his/her position  and  has  sexual  intercourse with any person in that hospital, such sexual intercourse  not  amounting  to the  offence  of  sexual  assault,  shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which  shall not  be  less  than five years and which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.
Provided  that  the  court  may,  for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose  a sentence  of  imprisonment  for  a  term of less than five years.
Explanation.- The expression  "hospital"  shall  have  the same  meaning  as  in  Explanation 3 to sub-section (2) of section 376."
                               (paragraphs 3.4 & 3.4.1, supra)
7.2.5. Insertion of new section 376E recommended.- A  new section,  namely,  section  376E be inserted in the IPC in the following terms:
 "376E. Unlawful sexual contact.- (1) Whoever, with sexual intent, touches, directly or indirectly, with  a  part  of the  body  or  with  an  object,  any  part of the body of another person, not  being  the  spouse  of  such  person, without  the  consent  of  such  other  person,  shall  be punished with simple imprisonment for  a  term  which  may extend to two years or with fine or with both.
(2)    Whoever,  with sexual intent, invites, counsels or incites a young person to touch, directly  or  indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object, the body of any person,  including  the body of the person who so invites, counsels or  incites,  or  touches,  with  sexual  intent, directly or indirectly, with a part of the body or with an object  any  part  of the body of a young person, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.
(3)    Whoever being in a position of trust or  authority towards  a young person or is a person with whom the young person  is  in  a  relationship  of  dependency,  touches, directly or indirectly, with sexual intent, with a part of the  body  or with an object, any part of the body of such young person,  shall  be  punished  with  imprisonment  of either  description  which  may  extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation:   "Young  person"  in  this  sub-section  and sub-section  (2)  means  a person below the age of sixteen years."
                               (paragraphs 3.5 & 3.5.1, supra)
7.2.6. Deletion   of   section  377.-  Section  377,  IPC deserves to  be  deleted  in  the  light  of  the  changes effected by  us  in section 375 to 376E.  We leave persons having carnal intercourse with any animal, to  their  just deserts.
                               (paragraph 3.6, supra)
7.2.7. Amendment of section 509, IPC.- We recommend  that the existing section 509 be amended as follows:
"509.  Word,  gesture  or  act  intended  to  insult  the modesty of a woman:
Whoever,  intending  to  insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any  sound  or  gesture,  or exhibits  any  object  intending  that  such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or  object  shall  be seen,  by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple  imprisonment  for  a term  which  may  extend  to three years and shall also be liable to fine."
                               (paragraph 3.7, supra)
7.2.8. New  section  166A, IPC recommended.- We recommend that a new section 166A be introduced in the  IPC  in  the following terms:
"166A.  Whoever, being a public servant-
(a)  knowingly  disobeys  any direction of the  law  prohibiting  him  from   requiring   the attendance  at  any  place  of  any person for the purpose of investigation into an offence or  other matter, or
(b) knowingly disobeys any other direction of the law regulating the manner in which he shall conduct  such  investigation,  to the prejudice of any person, shall be  punished  with  imprisonment for  a  term  which may extend to one year or with fine or with both."
                       (paragraphs 3.8 & 3.8.1, supra)
7.2.9. No  definition  of  the  expression  "consent"  is called for at this stage.
                               (paragraph 3.9, supra)
7.3.   Changes  recommended  in  the  Code  of   Criminal Procedure, 1973
7.3.1. Insertion  of  sub-sections (3) and (4) in section 160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.- We recommend that the following two sub-sections be inserted in section160 of the Code of Criminal Procedure:
"(3) Where under this chapter, the statement of  a female   is   to   be  recorded  either  as  first information of an offence or in the course  of  an  investigation  into an offence and she is a person against whom an offence under sections  354,  375, 376,  376A,  376B,  376C, 376D, 376E or 509 of the Indian  Penal  Code  is  alleged  to   have   been committed  or  attempted,  the  statement shall be recorded by a female police officer and in case  a female  police  officer  is  not  available,  by a female  government  servant   available   in   the vicinity  and  in case a female government servant is also not available, by a female  authorised  by  an organisation interested in the welfare of women or children.
(4)  Where  in  any  case none of the alternatives mentioned in sub-section (3) can be  followed  for the reason that no female police officer or female government  servant  or  a female authorised by an organisation interested in the  welfare  of  women and  children  is available, the officer in charge of the police station shall, after  recording  the reasons  in writing, proceed with the recording of the  statement  of  such  female  victim  in   the presence of a relative of the victim."
               (paragraphs   4.2.3  &  4.2.3.1, supra)
7.3.2. Modification  of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 160.- We recommend raising the  age  mentioned  in the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 160 from fifteen years to sixteen years.
                               (paragraph 4.3, supra)
7.3.3. Substitution  of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 160 recommended.- We recommend that in addition to the above modification, the proviso to sub-section (1)  of section 160 be substituted to read as follows:
"Provided that no male person under the age of  16 years  or woman shall be required to attend at any place other than the  place  in  which  such  male person or  woman  resides.    While  recording the statement, a relative or  a  friend  or  a  social worker of the choice of the person whose statement is  being  recorded  shall  be  allowed  to remain present.  The relative, friend or social worker so allowed to be present shall not interfere with the  recording of statement in any manner whatsoever."
               (paragraphs 4.3.1 & 4.3.2, supra)
7.3.4. Insertion of a new section, namely,  section  164A in  the  Code  of  Criminal Procedure, 1973.- We recommend that the following section 164A be inserted in the Code of Criminal Procedure:
"164A.   (1)  Where, during the stage when any  offence  under  section  376,  section  376A, section   376B,  section  376C,  section  376D  or section 376E is  under  investigation  and  it  is proposed  to  get the victim examined by a medical expert, such examination shall be conducted  by  a registered  medical practitioner, with the consent of the victim or of some person competent to  give such consent on his/her behalf.  In all cases, the victim should be sent for such examination without any delay.
Provided that if the victim happens to  be a   female,   the  medical  examination  shall  be conducted by a female medical officer, as  far  as possible.
(2) The registered medical practitioner to whom  the  victim is forwarded shall without delay examine  the   person   and   prepare   a   report  specifically   recording   the   result   of   his examination and giving the following details:
(i) the name and address of the victim and the person by whom he/she was brought,
(ii) the age of the victim,
(iii)  marks  of  injuries, if any, on the person of the victim,
(iv)  general  mental  condition  of   the victim and
(v)   other   material   particulars,   in reasonable detail.
(3)  The  report shall state precisely the reasons for each conclusion arrived at.
(4) The report shall  specifically  record that  the  consent of the victim or of some person competent to give such consent on  his/her  behalf to such examination had been obtained.
(5)  The  exact  time  of commencement and completion of the examination shall also be  noted in   the   report,   and  the  registered  medical practitioner  shall  without  delay,  forward  the report  to  the  investigating  officer, who shall forward  it  to  the  Magistrate  referred  to  in section  173  as part of the documents referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (5) of that section.
(6)  Nothing  in  this  section  shall  be construed  as  rendering  lawful  any  examination without the consent of the victim  or  any  person competent to give such consent on his/her behalf."
                       (paragraphs 4.5.1 and 4.5.2, supra)
7.3.5. Insertion  of  new  section  53A  in  the  Code of Criminal Procedure recommended.- The proposed section  53A shall read as follows:
"53A. (1)  When  a  person accused of any of the offences under sections  376,  376A,  376B,  376C, 376D or 376E or of an attempt to commit any of the said  offences,  is arrested and an examination of his/her person is to be made under  this  section, he/she   shall   be  sent  without  delay  to  the registered medical practitioner by whom he/she  is to be examined.
(2)  The  registered  medical practitioner conducting such examination  shall  without  delay examine   such   person   and   prepare  a  report specifically   recording   the   result   of   his examination and giving the following particulars:
(i)  the  name  and address of the accused and the  person  by  whom  he  was brought,
(ii) the age of the accused,
(iii)  marks of injury, if any, on the person of the accused, and
(iv) other material particulars in reasonable detail.
(3) The report shall state  precisely  the reasons for each conclusion arrived at.
(4)  The  exact  time  of commencement and completion of the examination shall also be  noted in   the   report,   and  the  registered  medical practitioner shall,  without  delay,  forward  the report  to  the  investigating  officer, who shall forward  it  to  the  Magistrate  referred  to  in section  173  as part of the documents referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (5) of that section."
                       (paragraph 4.6.2, supra)
7.3.6. Consequential  amendments in the First Schedule to the  Code  of  Criminal  Procedure,   1973   recommended.

Consequent  upon  the  proposed amendments in the IPC, the existing entries in respect of sections 376 to  376D,  377 and  509  will have to be substituted and entry in respect of new section 376E, IPC  will  have  to  be  inserted.

172nd Report "Precise issues".- The `precise issues' for consideration before the Law Commission.

Under an order dated August 9, 1999 made  in  Writ Petition  (Crl)  No.33 of 1997, the Supreme Court of India requested the Law Commission "to examine the issues raised  by the petitioners and examine the feasibility  of  making recommendations  for amendment of the Indian Penal Code or deal with the same in any other manner so as to  plug  the loopholes."
The  Supreme  Court  of  India  was approached for-
a) issuance of a writ in the  nature  of   a  declaration  or  any  other  appropriate  writ  or direction declaring inter alia that  `sexual  intercourse' as contained in section 375 of the Indian Penal Code shall include  all  forms  of penetration such as penile/vaginal penetration, penile/oral    penetration,    penile/anal penetration,  finger/vaginal  and  finger/anal penetration and  object/vaginal  penetration  and 
(b)  to   issue   a consequential  writ, order or direction to the respondents in the Writ Petition and to their servants and  agents  to register all such cases found to be true on investigation.
Though the  Law  Commission  was  not made a party to the Writ Petition.  The Supreme Court however directed the Law Commission, by its Order dated 13th January, 1998, to indicate its response with respect to the issues raised in the said  Writ  Petition. The Law Commission in its affidavit  dated  25.3.1998  brought  to the notice of the Hon'ble Court that the 156th Report of the Law  Commission on  the  Indian Penal Code had dealt, inter alia, with the issues raised in the Writ Petition,  but  since  the  said Report  was  not  yet placed on the table of the Houses of Parliament, the matter may be adjourned by a  few  months. The matter  was adjourned by three months.  Meanwhile, the aforesaid Report of the Law Commission was placed  on  the table of  both  the Houses of Parliament.  Thereafter, the Law Commission filed its affidavit dated  28.7.98  setting out  in  extenso  the  portions of the said Report dealing with the issues in question.  Suffice it to  say  that  by and  large  the  then Law Commission (14th Law Commission) did not agree with the viewpoint of the  writ  petitioners except  in certain minor respects which would be indicated at the appropriate stage later.  It is  after  considering the said affidavit and the affidavit filed by the Ministry of  Law,  Justice  and  Company  Affairs, that the Hon'ble Court passed the aforesaid order dated 9th August, 1999.
The  order  of  the  Hon'ble  Court  records   the statement  of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners that  the  contents  of  the  156th  Report  of  the   Law Commission  were  known  to the  petitioners,  but  since according to them the Report did not deal with the precise issues raised in the writ petition, a request was made  by the   counsel   for   the   petitioner   to  seek further consideration of the issues by the Law Commission and  the Government of India.  The Court was inclined to agree with the said submissions.  The Court also noted that the 156th Report  was submitted by the Law Commission prior to these issues being referred to the Commission and  further  that the  said  Report  of  the Law Commission did not in terms deal with various aspects of the issues raised in the Writ Petition. The  order  further  recorded  that   at   the suggestion  of  the Hon'ble Court, the petitioner did draw up a note containing the precise issues  involved  in  the Writ Petition  as  well  as other connected issues.  After perusing the same, the Court asked the Law  Commission  to examine the  said  issues afresh. A copy of the `precise issues' with the appendix and affidavit were sent  to  the Secretary, Law Commission with a request to place the same before   the   Chairman   of   the   Law   Commission  for consideration.   It  was  also  observed  that   the   Law Commission may, if so advised, call upon the petitioner to assist  it  in  such  manner  as  the  Commission  thought appropriate.  The issues,  the  Court  observed,  "need  a thorough examination".      The   matter  was  accordingly adjourned for three months within  which  period  the  Law Commission  was  expected  to  submit  its response to the Hon'ble Court.
The order of the Hon'ble Court was received by the Secretary to the Law  Commission  on 19.8.99  and  placed before the Chairman.
"Precise  issues".- The `precise issues' submitted by the petitioner before the Court  and which have  been sent  to  the Law Commission for consideration are divided into three parts (Annexure-A).  
Part I carries  the  title "Precise  issues  submitted  for  consideration of the Law Commission and the Government of India".  
Part II  carries the heading "Existing inadequacies" and 
Part III is titled "Suggestions for  amendment to the Indian Penal Code".  We shall set out in brief the substance  of  the  submissions made in all the three parts.

Part I: Precise issues submitted for consideration of  the  Law  Commission and the Government of India.- 
(1)  Having regard to the widespread prevalence of child sexual abuse, would it not be appropriate to include all forms of penetration   such    as    penile/vaginal    penetration, penile/oral    penetration,    penile/anal    penetration, finger/vagina    and    finger/anal   penetration     and object/vaginal  penetration  within  the  meaning  of  the expression "penetration" in the Explanation to section 375 of the   IPC.      The   restrictive   interpretation   of  `penetration'  in  the  Explanation to section 375 defeats the very purpose and object underlying section 376(2)(f); 
(2)    Is it not wrong to classify the penetrative  abuse of  a child below the age of 12 as unnatural offence under section 377 IPC or as outraging the  modesty  of  a  woman under   section   354,   depending   upon  the  `type'  of penetration ignoring the `impact' on such child.
(3)    Is   it   not   wrong   to   continue   to   treat non-consensual  penetration  upon  such a child as offence under section  377  IPC  on  par  with  certain  forms  of consensual penetration  (e.g.   consensual homosexual sex) where consenting party can be held liable as an abettor or otherwise.

`Appendix A' appended to  Part  I  contains  three notes, which we shall refer to in seriatum: 
Note 1: The  Explanation to sections 375 and 376 says that "penetration  is  sufficient  to constitute  the   sexual intercourse necessary  to  the  offence  of rape".  By the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1983, raping of a woman under twelve years of age  was  made  punishable with  rigorous imprisonment  for  a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may be for life in addition to fine.    In such  a  situation, it would be appropriate to broaden the meaning of  penetration  to  include  not  only   vaginal penetration  but also anal and oral penetration as well as penetration by any part of the body or by any object.
Note 2: In a vast majority of child sexual abuse cases the penetration is   other   than   penile-vaginal.       Such penetration  causes  lasting  psychic damage to the child.  In such a situation, a  restrictive  meaning  attached  to penetration is likely to prove inadequate.
Note 3(a):     The 156th Report of the Law Commission has recommended  that  penile/oral penetration and penile/anal penetration be covered by section 377 IPC and that  finger penetration and object penetration into vagina or anus can be adequately covered under section 354 with a more severe punishment.  This recommendation requires reconsideration. Such  a  restrictive view fails to take into consideration several forms of child abuse and  the further  fact  that very  often  the  sexual  abuse  of children is by persons  known to them.  As  a matter  of  fact,  rape  is  really intended   to   humiliate,  violate  or  degrade  a  woman sexually. It adversely affects the sexual  integrity  and autonomy of   women   and   children.      The   aforesaid  recommendation of the Law Commission therefore defeats the very object underlying the Criminal Law  (Amendment)  Act, 1983  which  inserted  sub-section  (2)  and in particular clause (f)  thereof   in   section   376. 
The   above recommendation  also  does  not take into account the fact that a child of tender years can not discern the degree of difference  in  terms  of  which  orifice   of   hers   is penetrated.    Certain  instances  are  then  set  out  to illustrate the aforesaid point.
Note 3(b):     Under this note, the petitioner has sought to argue in the light of  the  instances mentioned  under Note  3(a)  that  the  156th  Report of the Law Commission requires reconsideration.
Part II:       Existing  Inadequacies.-   Various instances  set  out in Appendix-B to Annexure-A (a copy of the submissions of Sakshi including Appendix-B is enclosed herewith) to this part, the petitioner argues,  would  not
amount  to  rape  and  perhaps not even to natural offence under section 377 or to outraging the modesty of  a  woman under section  354,  in  view  of  the existing law.  They might just be a limited form of assault or criminal force, if at all, though all the said instances are  of  a  grave nature and   extremely   disturbing.     It  is  therefore necessary that there should be a rethinking on this  issue and  the  offence  of  `sexual  assault'  should  be  more precisely defined and its parameters indicated.
Part III:      Suggestions   for   amendment   to Indian  Penal  Code.-  This  part  sets  out  the several amendments proposed by the petitioner.  Suffice it to  say that they seek to substitute the definition of `rape' with the  definition  of  `sexual  assault'  and make it gender neutral.  The object is to widen the scope of the offence. The expression `consent' is also sought to be defined.   A new  section,  section  375A  with the heading `Aggravated sexual assault' is sought to be created.  This new offence seeks to synthesise the offences  now  categorised under sub-section (2) of section 376 as well as sections 376B to 376D.

A copy of the draft of comments prepared by the Law Commission was thereafter forwarded to Sakshi inviting their views thereon and for suggesting changes of a procedural nature, whether in the Criminal Procedure Code or the Evidence Act.  Later on, three other organisations, namely, Interventions for Support, Healing and Awareness – IFSHA, All India Democratic Women’s Association – AIDWA and the National Commission for Women – NCW  also presented their views on the proposed suggestions.

After detailed discussions with these organisations, the Commission has recommended changes for widening the scope of the offence in section 375 and to make it gender neutral. Various other changes have been recommended in sections 376, 376A to 376D.  The commission have also recommended insertion of a new section 376F dealing with unlawful sexual contact, deletion of section 377 of the IPC and enhancement of punishment in section 509 of the IPC.  In order to plug the loopholes in procedural provisions, the commission have also recommended various changes in the Code  of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and in the Evidence Act, 1872.


The Hon’ble Supreme Court forwarded vide its order dated 18.2.2000 the comments of the petitioner on the Response and Recommendations of the Law Commission of India for consideration.  The Commission accordingly considered those comments and submitted its further response and recommendations dated 14.3.2000.


The Report focuses on the need to review the rape laws in the light of increased incidents of custodial rape and crime of sexual abuse against youngsters.  The crime of sexual assault on a child causes lasting psychic damage to the child and as such, it is essential to prevent sexual abuse of children through stringent provisions.  The UN Conventions and various constitutional provisions also underline the need for protecting the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.  This above Report aims at the attainment of these objectives.


Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) - 172nd Report on Review of Rape Laws by Law Commission of India, Extract of Operative portion of the judgement of THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI, dated 2nd July, 2009 and THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA dated December 11, 2013

“The Bible contains six admonishments to homosexuals and 362 admonishments to heterosexuals. That doesn't mean that God doesn't love heterosexuals. It's just that they need more supervision.” — Lynn Lavner

“I don't understand why it is considered by some people to be a threat to heterosexual marriage to allow it by gays and lesbians. Shouldn't we be promoting that kind of faithfulness and loyalty to one's partner regardless of sexual orientation?” —Al Gore

“For a long time I thought I wanted to be a nun. Then I realized that what I really wanted to be was a lesbian.”    — Mabel Maney

“Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are at risk every day of their lives.” —Jeffrey Montgomery LGBT activist

“My lesbianism is an act of Christian charity. All those women out there praying for a man, and I'm giving them my share.” —Rita Mae Brown

“If you had told me 28 years ago that the largest organization in the world touching the lives of gays and lesbians would be a church, I would not have believed you.” —Troy Perry, Metropolitan Community Church founder

“My lesbianism is an act of Christian charity. All those women out there praying for a man, and I'm giving them my share.” —Rita Mae Brown

“Wherever it has been established that it is shameful to be involved with sexual relationships with men, that is due to evil on the part of the rulers, and to cowardice on the part of the governed.” —Plato

“Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are at risk every day of their lives.” —Jeffrey Montgomery (1953–) LGBT activist

“There are some people in this world that believe being gay is a choice. It's not a choice, we're born this way.” —Lady Gaga

“You have the audacity to talk about protecting families and children from the homosexual menace, while you yourselves tear apart families and drive children to despair. I don't know why my son is gay, but I do know that God didn't put him, and millions like him, on this Earth to give you someone to abuse.” —Sharon Underwood

Extract of the 172nd Report on Review of Rape Laws by Law Commission of India

Mr. B.P.JEEVAN REDDY forwarded the 172nd Report on Review of Rape Laws to Shri Ram Jethmalani , the then Minister for Law, Justice & Co.Affairs, Government of India.
In Writ Petition (Crl.) No.33 of 1997, the petitioner, “Sakshi” an organisation interested in the issues concerning women, approached the Supreme Court of India inter alia for directions concerning the definition of the expression “sexual intercourse” as contained in section 375 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Supreme Court by its order dated 13th January, 1998 directed the Law Commission to indicate its response with respect to the issues raised in the above writ petition.  The Commission filed an affidavit dated 28.7.1998 setting  out in extenso the portions of its 156th Report on the Indian Penal Code dealing with the issues in question.  In the said Report, the then Law Commission (14th Law Commission) did not agree with the viewpoint of the writ petitioners except in certain minor respects.  The Supreme Court was inclined to agree with the submissions of the writ petitioners that the contents of the 156th Report did not deal with the precise issues raised in the writ petition.
On the directions of the Hon’ble Court, the petitioner drew up a note containing the precise issues involved in the petition.  The Commission was asked by the Hon’ble Court by its order dated 9th August, 1999 to examine the said issues afresh.  The Court observed that the issues needed a thorough examination.  By the said order dated 9th August, 1999, the Hon’ble Court requested the Law Commission “to examine the issues submitted by the petitioners and examine the feasibility of making recommendations for amendment of the Indian Penal Code or deal with the same in any other manner so as to plug the loopholes”.
 A copy of the draft of comments prepared by the Law Commission was thereafter forwarded to Sakshi inviting their views thereon and for suggesting changes of a procedural nature, whether in the Criminal Procedure Code or the Evidence Act.  Later on, three other organisations, namely, Interventions for Support, Healing and Awareness – IFSHA, All India Democratic Women’s Association – AIDWA and the National Commission for Women – NCW  also presented their views on the proposed suggestions.
After detailed discussions with these organisations, the Commission has recommended changes for widening the scope of the offence in section 375 and to make it gender neutral.  Various other changes have been recommended in sections 376, 376A to 376D.  The commission have also recommended insertion of a new section 376F dealing with unlawful sexual contact, deletion of section 377 of the IPC and enhancement of punishment in section 509 of the IPC.  In order to plug the loopholes in procedural provisions, the commission have also recommended various changes in the Code  of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and in the Evidence Act, 1872.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court forwarded vide its order dated 18.2.2000 the comments of the petitioner on the Response and Recommendations of the Law Commission of India for consideration.  The Commission accordingly considered those comments and submitted its further resposne and recommendations dated 14.3.2000.
 The Report focuses on the need to review the rape laws in the light of increased incidents of custodial rape and crime of sexual abuse against youngsters.  The crime of sexual assault on a child causes lasting psychic damage to the child and as such, it is essential to prevent sexual abuse of children through stringent provisions.  The UN Conventions and various constitutional provisions also underline the need for protecting the child from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.  This above Report aims at the attainment of these objectives.

Extract of Operative portion of the judgement of THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA dated December 11, 2013, in CIVIL APPEAL NO.10972-86 OF 2013 in the case of - 'Suresh Kumar Koushal and another ... Appellants versus NAZ Foundation and others ... Respondents' is as under-

“54. In view of the above discussion, we hold that Section 377 IPC does not suffer from the vice of unconstitutionality and the declaration made by the Division Bench of the High court is legally unsustainable.
55. The appeals are accordingly allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 is dismissed.
56. While parting with the case, we would like to make it clear that this Court has merely pronounced on the correctness of the view taken by the Delhi High Court on the constitutionality of Section 377 IPC and found that the said section does not suffer from any constitutional infirmity. Notwithstanding this verdict, the
competent legislature shall be free to consider the desirability and propriety of deleting Section 377 IPC from the statute book or amend the same as per the suggestion made by the Attorney General.

Extract of Operative portion of the judgement of THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI in WP(C) No.7455/2001, dated 2nd July, 2009 in the case of,  Naz Foundation .... Petitioner versus Government of NCT of Delhi and Others .... Respondents' is as under-
“CONCLUSION
129. The notion of equality in the Indian Constitution flows from the ‘Objective Resolution’ moved by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru on December 13, 1946. Nehru, in his speech, moving this Resolution wished that the House should consider the Resolution not in a spirit of narrow legal wording, but rather look at the spirit behind that Resolution. He said, ”Words are magic things often enough, but even the magic of words sometimes cannot convey the magic of the human spirit and of a Nation’s passion…….. (The Resolution) seeks very feebly to tell the world of what we have thought or dreamt of so long, and what we now hope to achieve in the near future.” [Constituent Assembly Debates: Lok Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi: 1999, Vol. I, pages 57-65].
130. If there is one constitutional tenet that can be said to be underlying theme of the Indian Constitution, it is that of 'inclusiveness'. This Court believes that Indian Constitution reflects this value deeply ingrained in Indian society, nurtured over several generations. The inclusiveness that Indian society traditionally displayed, literally in every aspect of life, is manifest in recognising a role in society for everyone. Those perceived by the majority as “deviants' or 'different' are not on that score excluded or ostracised.
131. Where society can display inclusiveness and understanding, such persons can be assured of a life of dignity and nondiscrimination. This was the 'spirit behind the Resolution' of which Nehru spoke so passionately. In our view, Indian Constitutional law does not permit the statutory criminal law to be held captive by the popular misconceptions of who the LGBTs are. It cannot be forgotten that discrimination is antithesis of equality and that it is the recognition of equality which will foster the dignity of every individual.
132. We declare that Section 377 IPC, insofar it criminalises consensual sexual acts of adults in private, is violative of Articles 21, 14 and 15 of the Constitution. The provisions of Section 377 IPC will continue to govern non-consensual penile non-vaginal sex and penile non-vaginal sex involving minors. By 'adult' we mean everyone who is 18 years of age and above. A person below 18 would be presumed not to be able to consent to a sexual act. This clarification will hold till, of course, Parliament chooses to amend the law to effectuate the recommendation of the Law Commission of India in its 172nd Report which we believe removes a great
deal of confusion. Secondly, we clarify that our judgment will not result in the re-opening of criminal cases involving Section 377 IPC that have already attained finality. We allow the writ petition in the above terms.”

Thursday, January 30, 2014

Residential accommodation to public representative as well as official of government

India need to review its policy for official residential accommodation to public representative as well as official of government because of the paucity and scarcity of amenities for public purposes like hospitals, schools, old age home etc. there should be some Group Housing scheme for these representatives and Public officials and sprawling bungalows for them may be vacated and be used for the other purposes which may be used to meet the public propose.

Wednesday, January 29, 2014

दिल की बात

यहां पढ़ें राहुल गांधी की दिल की बात -
जब सरकार कांग्रेस चलती है तो कानून भी कोंग्रेस को अपने सांसदों को कह कर बनबाना चाहिए न की जजों और मीडिया और हम सड़क के लोग को पर क्या करे भारत का दुर्भाग्य की राहुल जी के पुरखो ने देश का ठेका ले रखा था और उन्होंने देश बेच दिया. अब अगर मीडिया और जज सड़क पर कानून बना रहे हैं तो आपको उससे भी कस्ट हो रहा है. गलती आपके पुरखो की है जिन्होंने जजों को ये हक संबिधान में हक दे दिया
भारत की जनता की तरफ से मेरा सौरभ यादव का राहुल गाँधी को उनकी कांग्रेस कार्य समिति में कही बातोँ का जबाब
राहुल गांधी ने कहा कि सबसे पहले राजीव गांधी ही हैं जिन्होंने माना कि रुपये का 15 पैसा ही जमीन पर पहुंचता है इसका मतलब साफ है कि राहुल आपके पिता जी के पहले आपके ही परिवार के सदस्यों ने ही राज किया देस पर और अगर ८५ पैसे एक रूपये में रस्ते में ही ख़तम हुआ तो क्यूँ हुआ ये तो बताओ ये इस लिए हुआ ये जो योजनाओ की आप बात कर रहे हो इसका मकसद सिर्फ और सिर्फ सिस्टम जो लोग भी थे उनको रूपये के ८५ पैसे को आपके परिवार के महान लोग ने बाट कर अपना राज तंत्र स्थापित किया उसीका का नतीजा है कि आज तक कांग्रेस के सारे नेता आप लोगों के आगे पीछे घुमते रहते हैं नहीं तो ऐसा कुछ नहीं जो एक आम आदमी से आप या आपकी माता जी किसी आम माँ से भिन्न क्षमता बाले हैं ये सिर्फ इसलिए कि आप परिवार के तथाकथित महान लोगो ने देश को लूटने के लिए कांग्रेस का प्रयोग किया. आपके दिल में कांग्रेस बसती होगी हमारे दिल में तो भारत माता का वास है.

आपके दिल में कांग्रेस बसती होगी हमारे दिल में तो भारत माता का वास है.राहुल के मणिशंकर अय्यर की तारीफ करने के बिषय में यह कहना है की यह पहली बार हुआ है की किसी व्यक्ति ने यह मन कि नेहरु जी, इंदिरा जी, राजीव जी, सोनिया जी और राहुल आपके अलावां भारत का भला कोई और न तो सोचा है न ही इसके लायक ही है कि सोच सके. बदले हुए राजनैतिक माहौल में अब अगर आप इसतरह की तारीफ कर के यह बताना चाहते है की आपकी माँ और आपे अलावां बहुत लोग है कांग्रेस में तो यही लगता है जैसे लोमड़ी या सियार बकरी की खल पहन कर आ गयी है की देखो मई दूध देती हूँ गाय को छोड़ो. तो यह समझ लीजिये कि अब आम आदमी गुमराह नहीं होने वाला. आज के पहले कांग्रेस के किसी नेता का गुड गान किसी ने नहीं किया ऐसा लगता था जब मेरा भाई बताता था जो विदेश में है की भारत में अच्छे लोगो का अकाल है बाकि लोग देश को लूटना चाहते है. सिर्फनेहरु जी, इंदिरा जी, राजीव जी, सोनिया जी और राहुल आपके अलावां भारत का भला कोई और न तो सोचा है न ही इसके लायक ही है कि सोच सके. रही बात पंजायती राज की तो जो मुझे समझ आता है भारत का लोकतात्र तो आप के राजवंश के रहते आज तक आया ही नहीं आप तो सम्राट है और बाकि लोगो को या तो रजा या सामंत या जमींदार बना कर रखते है जिससे ओ आपके राजतन्त्र को चलने में सहयोग कर सके मगर. मणिशंकर अय्यर जी आज बहुत खुस होंगे की सम्राट ने उनका मह्हतव रखा.
पंचायती राज का कोई उपयोग भारत के विकास या पंचायती व्यवस्था का कोई फायदा हुआ हो ऐसा तो हुआ ह नहीं क्यूँ कि आप के पिता जी जो उस समय सम्राट थे उनको जनता की चिंता नहीं थी उनको तो अपने सामंतो को खुश करने के लिए जिससे उन सामंतो को अपने क्षेत्र पर कण्ट्रोल हो सके

राहुल ने कहा # लोकतंत्र एक व्यक्ति विशेष से नहीं चलता है. लोकतंत्र तानाशाही से नहीं चलता है. पैकेजिंग की राजनीति से असली मुद्दे छूट रहे हैं.
मेरा भारत के आम आदमी की तरफ से उत्तर :- राहुल व्यक्ति बिसेष से लोकतंत्र नहीं चलता ये अब समझ आने लगा है भारत देश को अब तक भारत में सलतनत थी आप के परिवार की जो राजतन्त्र अब ख़तम हो जायेगा तब जा कर भारत में लोक तंत्र आएगा और रही बात लोकतंत्र तानाशाही से नहीं चलता ओ तो पता है पर लोकतंत्र राजतन्त्र से भी नहीं चलता इस लिए राहुल जी आपका राज खत्म करना ही होगा भारत के आम आदमी को.

बकौल राहुल आईटीआई से आम जनता को ताकत मिली.
राहुल गांधी ने कहा
# हमने लोगों को आरटीआई दी. किसी ने आरटीआई की मांग नहीं की थी. कांग्रेस ने खुद ही आरटीआई दिया.
आपकी बात के जबाब में मुझे यह कहना है की अगर आप इतने ही भले मानुस है और आपकी पार्टी RTI की सौगात भारत को दी तो अब क्यूँ नहीं राजनातिक दलों को भी RTI के दायरे में लेन देते है. लेकिन आप की सरकार ने तो १२ अगस्त २०१३ को RTI एक्ट का संसोधन बिल ही लोक्सभा में राजनातिक दलों को बहार लेन के लिए ले आये सिर्फ इसलिए जिससे न्यायालयों के आदेशो से बाख जाये और सूचना न देनी पड़े आप लोग क्या छुपाना न्चाहते हो आप तो जनता के लिए करते हो न . नहीं गलती हो गयी आप तो सम्राट हो और बाकि राजा और सामंत को भी आप का दायित्व है बचाना इस लिए आपने संसोधन बिल लाये जब की ६ राट्रीय दल :- Congress, BJP, NCP, CPI(M), CPI and BSP have been substantially funded indirectly by the Central Government और आप सरे दल लोक चरित्र के है तो क्यूँ न हो आप RTI के दायरे में पात्र आप तो सम्राट है और आपको अपने अदीन राजाओ और सामंतो का भी दयां रखना है जनता तो गुलाम है .

राहुल ने कहा :-
# लोकपाल को लेकर तमाशा हुआ. लोकपाल कांग्रेस ने बनाया. भ्रष्टाचार मिटाने के लिए संसद में 6 और बिल पड़े हैं. इन बिलों को पास करके दिखाएंगे.
मेरा कहना है कि सरकार कांग्रेस चला रही है और उम्मीद की जाती है की जनता कानून बनाये ये सरे कानून जो राहुल बता रहे है ओ आपने या आपके पापा या आपकी दादी या आपकी मम्मी ने पहले क्यूँ नहीं बनवाया क्या तब जरूरत नहीं थी क्या तब ये प्रोब्लेम नहीं थी. थी पर आप को अब श्रेय लेना है आगे बाद कर क्यूँ की अगर आप नहीं बनोगे तो हम तो बनायेगे. और अब जब बनना तय है तो क्यूँ न श्रेय लिया जाया की पालिसी चलाया जाय. आपकी या आपकी मम्मी की मनसा अगर सही होती तो आर टी आई संसोधन २०१३ न होता जिसमे आपने ६ राट्रीय दल :- Congress, BJP, NCP, CPI(M), CPI and BSP जो substantially funded indirectly by the Central Government है को आपने बचा लिया. यही राहुल बताना चाहते है न आप अगर आपको लता है की अभी भी हम आम आदमी को समझ नहीं आया तो बता दीजिये आपकी क्लास में आजायेंगे. समझा सके तो समझा दीजिये नहीं तो ये जान लीजिये खदेड़ खदेड़ कर राजतन्त्र का बुखार जो ताना सही में आप बदलना चाहते है उसको उतर देंगे. अब भी देर नहीं हुयी है कृपया मन जाईये .

सबसे घटिया दर्जे के लोग हैं आम आदमी पार्टी में : सलमान खुर्शीद

सही कहा सलमान खुर्शीद जी आम आदमी के आइडिया प्रागैतिहासिक काल के हैं, उनकी कोई गंभीर विचारधारा नहीं है, और देशभर के कुछ नहीं हम सारे सबसे घटिया दर्जे के लोग इसमें शामिल हैं..पर हम घटिया ही रह गए इस का योगदान तो कांग्रेस का ही तो है आप लोग तो आपने राज परिवार के लिए ही चिंता करते रहते है कभी हमें और हमारी जीवन की जरूरतों और हमें आच्छा जीवन देने की सोचते तो पर नहीं आपलोगों को तो हमें घटिया ही बनाए रखना है आप केंद्रीय विदेशमंत्री और कांग्रेस के वरिष्ठ नेता है लोगों की वैशाखी को भी बेच देते है क्यों की हम वैशाखी लगा कर चलेंगे आपके आँखों के सामने का दृष्य घटिया लगेगा . धन्यवाद सलमान खुर्शीद जी

जय हिन्द हमें उतर प्रदेश से श्री अखिलेश यादव की और उनके परिवार की सरकार को हटाने का विडा उठाना है . ये कैसा राज तत्र है. माननीय मुलायम यादव जी के परिवार ने उत्तर प्रदेश को १०-१२ नेता दिए है जो आज उत्तर प्रदेश का भविष्य अपने हाथ में ले कर बैठे हैं . ये जाती और धर्म के वाल पर अब सत्ता में रहना उचित नहीं.

उत्तर प्रदेश के वोटर और आम आदमी पार्टी के सदस्यों हमारे ऊपर आज बहुत बड़ी जिम्मेदारी आगई है क्योंकि देश का ८० संसद उत्तर प्रदेश चुनता है. अगर हम ठान ले की हमें उत्तर प्रदेश से अच्छे सांसदों को ही चुनना और साथ ही हमें उत्तर प्रदेश से वंश वाद और राजतंत्र जैसी प्रणाली चलाने पर आतुर नेतागन की हरा कर आम आदमी पार्टी को विजयी बनाना होगा .
कांग्रेस और भाजपा ने देश के लोकतंत्र को मजाक समझ रखा है क्या देश जकी जनता द्वारा चुने गए सांसदों को जो अधिकार प्राप्त है उसको ये बड़े दल अपने घर से चलाना चाहते है.

अगर आप अच्छे उम्मीदवार खड़े करो और जनता उनको चुनेगी.

हमें राहुल गांधी या नरेंद्र मोदी लेकर परेशांन नहीं होना चहिये. जनता द्वारा चुने सांसद अपना प्रतिनिधी चुने.

मजबूत प्रधानमंत्री तब मिलेगा जब ये बड़े दल अपने पार्टी में संसदीय परंपरा के साथ लोक तंत्र स्थापित करें . देश को ये दल अपने कारगुजारियों से दल दल में डाल रहे हैं .

जहाँ तक राजनैतिक दल के नुमाइंदे जिस तरह के गलत वयानी कर रही है उससे भारत के लोकतंत्र में जहर घुल रहा है.

जो भी आदमी अपने संस्कारों को भूल गये उनको लोकतंत्र में नहीं रहना चाहिए.

देश की आजादी के इस आन्दोलन में सहभागी बने आज तक हमें गुमराह किया गया हमारे पुरखों को गुमराह किया गया नेता जी सुभाषचंद्र, चंद्रशेखर को भगतसिंह को सभी शहीदों का अपमान किया गया अब नहीं अब नहीं बर्दास्त . हमें आज़ादी चाहिए उससे कुछ कम नहीं

अखिलेश जी जब जवानो का कटा सर सरहद से आया था सरकार कंजूसी क्यूँ कर रही थी. १ करोड़ रूपये कुछ नहीं होते परन्तु अधिवक्ताओं के लिए एक १०*२० = २०० स्क्वायर फीट के कमरे में एक पुस्तकालय खोल दिया जिस कमरे का किराया व उसके रख रखाव, पुस्तकालय का उपयोग करने वाले अधिवक्ताओं या विधि स्नातकों से सिर्फ २०० रूपये महीना लिया जाय तो २००*१०० = २०००० प्रति माह के हिसाब से होते हैं. आप के द्वारा दिए गए १ करोड़ का उपयोग पुस्तकालय को तैयार करने में किया जा सकता है .यह सिर्फ एक उदाहरण है . और भी तरीके से जनता के भलाई के लिए खर्च किये जा सकते हैं .इस तरह के खर्चे से भी रोजगार का सृजन हो सकता है.

जदयू के नेता जो व्यान दे रहे है उन्हें लगता है किसी भी जाती धर्मं देश में इसतरह की परम्परा मंजूर है जहाँ तक मुझे पता है नहीं. आप के ही न्यूज में ये लिखा --(- ‘‘चाय विक्रेता ’’ विवाद में शामिल हो गया और कहा कि ‘‘जहरीली’’ चाय बेचने वाले व्यक्ति को प्रधानमंत्री नहीं बनना चाहिए.) क्या इस तरह के वयान से देश की जनता पर क्या असर पड़ेगा.

कांग्रेस महासचिव अजय माकन व . केंद्रीय मंत्री मनीष तिवारी के वयान कि कांग्रेस देश को मजबूत प्रधानमंत्री देती है ये सिर्फ गुमराहन करने वाला है आज तक देश को अच्चा प्रधानमन्त्री नहीं मिला
जवाहर लाल नेहरू गुलजारीलाल नंदा लालबहादुर शास्त्री इन्दिरा गान्धी इन्दिरा गान्धी राजीव न्धी नरसिंह राव मनमोहन सिंह कांग्रेस के व मोरारजी देसाई भी कभी कांग्रेस के ही थे . ये मेरी व्यक्तिगत राय है परन्तु मुझे कोई नहीं मिला जो इन सबको मजबूत कहा हो.

ये सारे नेता सिर्फ प्रधानमन्त्री बनना या बनाना चाहते है देश का विकास कैसे हो ये किसी को चिंता नहीं है. देश बने या बिगड़े ये बन जाए इनको यही चिंता नहीं है

जदयू नेता के सी त्यागी ने कहा कि गुजरात के जरिए देश में जहरीली चाय बेचने वाले को प्रधानमंत्री नहीं बनना चाहिए. ये कण निर्णय लेगा की जहर है अमृत. ये सरे नेता जब अपनी बात होती है तो बोलते है कि न्यायपालिका के निर्णय तक मै निर्दोष हूँ मुझे किसी का पक्ष नहीं लेना पर पर यह परंपरा बंद होनी चाहिए

लोकसभा चुनावों में जनता को निर्णय करने दिया जाय.

जय हिन्द

Our system has failed

Every individual needs better life but only dreaming about the better life is not sufficient. I am an advocate and have been practicing almost all types of cases for more than ten years. My heart fills with pain when I see corruption in Judiciary which is supposed to be free from corruption. With time I have realized that unless the political system changes nothing can be changed.Poors are not getting justice. The true people will not get justice and it will always be bought by the mal-practioners.

Our system has failed, the present system of production and economy could not remove the inequalities of income and wealth and the very significant portion of the national resources is used to satisfy the want of the elite. Our system need reassessment of the and modification accordingly best suited to every individual whether it is the poorest or the elite. Poor and elite have to coexist and a system is required to improve the condition of poor with a goal to eradicate the poverty from the root.

To Increase employment and removal of unemployment for increasing gross national product which will result in increase in standard of living of general public in our country there are various retrogressive forces which operate such as inequality of income, poverty, absence of equal opportunity for progress. For removal of these and generate / foster social as well as individual development a mechanism which can consciously make effort is required but this type of system which are being propagated is destructive to the growth of the country and the democracy.

भारत को कांग्रेस मुक्त नहीं आज की जितनी भी पार्टिया है उनसबसे मुक्ति चाहिए

 भारत को कांग्रेस मुक्त नहीं आज की जितनी भी पार्टिया है उनसबसे मुक्ति चाहिए हमें कांग्रेस की सोच नहीं चाहिए हमें भारत के विकास भारत के स्वाभिमान भारत को भ्भ्रष्टाचार मुक्त करना होगा हमें फ़ूड सिक्यूरिटी नहीं हमें हर व्यक्ति बच्चा बुध सबके लिए सोशल सिक्यूरिटी सबको अपने लिए अपने परिवार को पालने खिलाने पढ़ाने सर के ऊपर छत आपातकाल में उचित आपतकालीन सुबीधाएं. स्वाभिमान से कही भी विचरण करने की आजादी.


हमारे गीता कुरान और बाइबिल में जो भी दार्शनिक बाते है वह सही है पर भूखे पेट भजन नहीं होता गाँधी



अशोक और गुरूनानक और उनके गुरु कबीर की सोच शिक्क्षा से हमारे पेट नहीं भरेंगे हम अपनी जिम्मेदारी न निभा पाए और फिर बोले ये देश कृष्ण कबीर और राम का था आप कुश रही आप भारत जैसे पवित्र इतिहास बाले देश में पैदा हुए और अगर नहीं पैदा हुए तो रहते है तो बस अब रहने दो बस अब रहने दो



हमें कांग्रेस की सोच को मिटने में अपनी उर्जा नहीं गवानी सही कहा अगर हम कांग्रेस की सोच गवाने की कोसिस करेंगे तो मिट जायेंगे इस लिए हे भारत के मेरे भाई बंधू आप से कर बद्ध प्रार्थना है की किसी के लिए गढ्ढा मत खोदो अपने लिए रोटी कमाने और अपने बच्चो के लिए पढने ओढने और उनको इस लायक बनाने में अपना टाइम और उर्जा खर्च करो



मुझे अपने भारतीयों भाइयों से बस यही कहना है की कांग्रेस या किसी के प्रति नकारात्मक सोच रखने की जरूरत नहीं है हमें तो सिर्फ अपने लिए अच्छे कर्म और अच्छी सुबिधा जो हमारे टैक्स देने बाले भाई टैक्स दे कर सरकार को देते है उसका उपयोग सही जगह होता है की नहीं वह देखना है . हमें यह देखना है की हमारे द्वारा चुने गए विधायाक संसद सभासद क्षेत्र एवं जिला पंचायत के सदस्य नगर पर्साद ग्राम प्रधान आदि आपने दायित्यों का निर्वाह कर रहे है की नहीं अगर हम इन सभी को अपने प्रति उत्तरदायित्व नहीं बना लेंगे तो हम अपने लिए गढ्ढा नहीं आग के कुएं खोद रहे है



अगर ये लोग सही होंगे तो कार्यपालिका भी अपना कार्य सही दांग से करेगी. 
हे भारत के लोगों हमें राजनीति नहीं करनी हमें हमारा लोकतात्र वापस चाहिए हमें अपने निर्णय लेने की सही आजादी चाहिये



आरटीआई, फूड सिक्योरिटी बिल, पंचायती राज, लोकपाल और आधार सभी योजनाओं का श्रेय लेने से कम नहीं चलेगा इन सभी योजना को पिछलें ५ महीने में ही क्यूँ लाये आप और आरटीआई, जो २००५ में आई उसमे २०१३ जो संसोधन आपने किया उसको करने के बाद आपकी आरटीआई, लाने का भी कोई फायदा नहीं. भारत के इलेक्शन में एक संसद को ४०लाख रूपये खर्च करने की छूट है मुझे सभी बड़ी और पुराणी पार्टिया ये बता दे उनको तो पैसे भी नहीं कर्च करनी चाहिए पूछिए क्यूँ वह इस लिए की आपने कहा की हमने इतना विओकास किया इतना कुछ किया फिर आपकी करनी के हिसाब से आपको तो जीत जाना चाहिए पर नहीं



अगर देश में सुचना तंत्र अच्चा हो तो सिर्फ आपको पोलिंग बूथ पर मशीन राखी होनी चाहिए और लोग अपना वोट दल कर चले जायेंगे पर आपने ६७ साल; में जान भूझ कर नहीं किया अब आप बोलेंग मई तो अभी १० साल से राजनीति में आया हूँ पर आपने कब सोचा की ऐसा हो . रही बात भविष्य की योजनाओं को तो अगर जन सुबिधा और जन सुचना औए सोशल सिक्यूरिटी को रेखांकित प्लान कर के सिर्फ ५ साल में देश को दुनिया के सबसे सम्प्पन देश के बराबर खड़ा किया जा सकता है



किसी भी राजनैतिक पार्टी को नेतृत्व की नहीं इच्छा शक्ति की जरूरत है जनता खुद साथ देगी अगर आप की नियत साफ होगी नेता की रास्ट्रीय सस्तर की पहचान उसके कार्य बनाते है कार्य करिए पहचान बन जाती है . मई अगर अपराधी हूँ और मेरी रास्ट्रीय स्तर की पहचान है तो क्या देश का नेतृत्व कर सकूँगा नहीं इसलिए जब काम करूँगा तो पहचान अपने आप हो जाएगी