Outraging the modesty of a woman meaning. Law Web: What is basic concept of outraging modesty of woman? 2019-01-16
Outraging the modesty of a woman meaning Rating:
5,9/10
1062
reviews
Insulting the Modesty of a Woman
Sec 498A and the Allegation of Misuse In the last 20 years of criminal law reform a common argument made against laws relating to violence against women in India has been that women misuse these laws. For a nation which reveres its women as goddesses, fresh crime statistics fail to reflect the very same. A woman possess modesty from cradle to grave. Our mission is to provide an online platform to help students to discuss anything and everything about Essay. State of Bihar and Ors. Section 304B-Dowry Death The Indian Penal Code under defines it as- Dowry death.
· In landmark case State of Punjab vs. State of Gujarat it was held that Section 304B is a substantive provision creating a new offence and not merely a provision effecting a change in procedure for trial of a pre-existing substantive offence. We might just believe that position of women in our country has improved, especially in bigger states, but that is nothing other than a myth. Else people would be tempted to rag her Oru ponnana kattupadanum Buddhi Sonnakka matupadanum Apdi illena kashtapadanum Ille pinnale nashtapadanum A woman should be bound by limits and be leveled by advice Otherwise she would have to suffer or face loss Disgusting though the scene is, this is a standard scene from 80 percent of the films even today. Elements of the Charge S 509 is a gender specific charge, where the victim must be a woman. He must use criminal force or assault with a guilty intention or knowledge.
Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman (Section 509 of IPC)
Kapadia has brought clarity to section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Even in such a case, section 304B is attracted and this position is not disputed. The accused person must be knowing that by using criminal force or assault, he will thereby Outrage the Modesty of that Woman. According to Shorter Oxford English Dictionary 3 rd Edn. Hence, the meaning remains unclear.
Law Web: What is basic concept of outraging modesty of woman?
The Constitution says that state shall not discriminate on basis of race, religion, sex etc, but there seems to be clear discrimination. Thirdly -- With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt. Because, you see, men, by nature, are supposed to molest women. Persons otherwise having scope of satisfaction of their urge on account of marital life restrain themselves to have extra marital relationship to avoid being shunned in the society in woman who is not the wife of accused, howsoever immoral may be, is not an offence unless it comes within any of the circumstances stated in section 375 I. Those were the days when you had to go and collect your daily milk supply from the milk kiosks in every locality and so we used to go together around 6 a. The court brushed aside the argument of lack of jurisdiction on technical grounds and held that since from the very beginning, the dowry demand had been present and subsequent behaviour was an ensuing consequence, all the offences can be tried together. Confidentiality This needs to be agreed upon among the co-owners it is not supposed to be a personal decision of one of the owners.
Clearly, education is not doing it. Another major inadequacy of this provision is the quantum of punishment. Modesty is one of the finest qualities of man and is akin to politeness. The un-convicted deviants in society are demoralisingly large and the State has, as yet, no convicting National policy on femaleflesh and sex sanity. The accused was found to have committed offence under Section 354 and was sentenced to one year imprisonment.
Vs State of Tamil Nadu, Appeal crl. · Also the maximum punishment for offences under Section 354 and 355 can be two years or fine or both. Even if the fine amount was below Rs. Whoever uses criminal force to her with intent to outrage her modesty commits an offence under Section 354. The one that is probably most common offence is cruelty. Section 498A-Cruelty Matrimonial Cruelty in India is a cognizable, non bailable and non-compoundable offence. The Supreme Court held that appellant being a railway employee; it was his duty to behave courteously to passengers.
My second question is quite open really, has anyone got any good tips for the 9 mark method question? If you were to search through the main source of criminal legislation in Singapore — the Penal Code — you can locate the term at. Further, mental cruelty varies from person to person depending on the intensity of the sensitivity, degree of courage and endurance to withstand such cruelty. The accused could not produce any cogent and material evidence on record to prove the alleged enmity. Madam Speaker, what is outraging is the fact that this hon. Many students no longer shower after exercise. Insult of Modesty aggravated by Racial or Religious Reasons Pursuant to s 74 2 a read with s 74 4 , enhanced penalties, one and a half times the normal maximum, apply to insult of modesty offences committed out of racial or religious hostility. The victim was a minor girl who was below 16 years.
The word cruelty in the Explanation clause attached to the section has been given a wider meaning. Many Muslim women wear a headscarf as a sign of modesty. However, there are still some loopholes that need to be addressed. Modesty usually says that the parts of the that do not need to be exposed should not be. The facts of the case also illustrate a classic example as to how a game- keeper has become a poacher or a treasury guard has become a robber.
State of Karnataka the appellant husband was held liable for dowry death under 304B I. It was thus held that though, this section gives wide discretion to the courts in the matters of interpretation of the words occurring in the laws and also in matters of awarding punishment. The pronouncement came in a case where one Ramkripal, convicted of rape, had sought lenience pleading that he was, at worst, guilty of outraging the woman's modesty. They have all the right to do whatever they want. So far as the present case is concerned, it is clear that when the applicant asked Saroj to remove her clothes, she refused to do so and shouted. The Court also adjudicated that Section 354 does not violate the provisions of Article 15 1 of the Constitution.
The amendment was made to make the provisions more incluisve and at the same time award a stricter punishment. In Patil Paresh Kumar Jayanti Lal v. In some cases, it may be necessary that they take off all the clothes, to be able to treat them better. In the case Girdhar Gopal vs. C and rigorous imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.
