Thursday, 29 August 2013

What Diff between Vodafone Tax case Vs New Hindu Marriage Law ?

Vodafone win Case in Supreme Court , But what about 20Crs+ Indian Married Men?

Nearly five years after the Indian taxman issued the first notice to Vodafone international on September 2007 for failure to withhold tax on payments made to Hutchison Telecom, Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia and Justice KS Radhakrishnan pronounced their judgement.

(Click here to read the detailed Supreme Court order)

Vodafone had argued India doesn't have jurisdiction to tax the Hutchison deal because it was structured as a transaction between two overseas entities. The tax department had said it has authority because the underlying asset was Indian.


Vodafone wins $2 bn tax case in Supreme Court | Business Standard

 

Now after Lost the Case in Sc Government of India , The union budget presented amended the income tax act retrospectively from 1962, giving the taxman powers to scrutinise offshore merger and acquisition deals. Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee later assured investors that deals more than six years old will not be reopened. This still leaves the sword hanging over the Vodafone case.
Now in case of Hindu Marriage Amended Bill, when many men married there was no Clause of 13F, special provision of Share in Property :

1. If wife file the Divorce after 3-years separation, husband can't oppose on ground Financials Hardship.
2. Without proving any Fault of Husband wife can Claim Share in Husbands ( before or after marriage hard earned)  Immovable+movable assets +Compensations , even court have to consider the Husbands Inherited & inheritable assets Value to order such compensations.
3. Husband is going to loose the Child as well as run behind the court next 10 to 20 years for 498A, DV act, CRPC125 etc.
4. Let wife had 100Crs Movable+movable assets ( some may you gifted her) along with her inherited or inheritable property in lacks , but husband will not have Rs.1 claim on that.

Now many men had not been engaged married to their present wife if such LAW had been in place when they got married.


RS approves Husband Killer Property Garbing LAW in name of Easy Divorce to Women.

D. Proposed Amendment: 13F and 28D:( Special provisions relating to disposal of property in proceedings under 13C)

Without prejudice to any customs or usage or any other law for the time being in force, the court may, at the time of passing of the degree under section 13C on a petition made by the wife, order that the husband shall give for her and children as defined in section 13E, such compensation which shall include a share in his share of the immovable property ( other than inherited or inheritable immovable property) and such amount by way of share in movable property, if any, towards the settlement of her claim, as the court may deem just and equitable, and while determining such compensation the court shall take into account the value of inherited or inheritable property of husband.

More than 20Crs+ men married under earlier Fault based divorce LAW which says if it is your fault you have to pay compensation to your wife, but if it is wife fault she is not entitle for any compensation.

But this 13C along with 13F take away that power form Indian husbands, let the fault lie in your wife, but it is you have to pay.
Now what option have for such more than 20crs+ men ? 
They got married under one LAW and suddenly one day Govt wake up and Say , Hey Men this is your New LAW of Hindu Marriage
.
Now you can't even fight in Court like Vodafone done , as SC will be hiding under article 15(3) and their repeated stand will be repeated, not interfere in Parliament LAW making process, let be against any Public interest or Country's Interest.
Amended to Income Tax LAW lead to loose confidence of many Company to invest in India, forget about FDI even more than 40% investment by Indian Company done outside India.
Let wait and see how this Hindu Marriage amended LAW change the total dimension of marriage system in India.
Many unmarried men may have option not to get married or marry outside India ( even to Nepal/Bangladesh/Srilanka/Thailand) , but what will happen to those already married in India like Vodafone invested their money in India without knowing that if Government loose Case in SC , they will amend the LAW itself to tie to pay for No Fault at your end.


Hence the sword hanging over the Hindu Married men the way the sword hanging over Vodafone in spite they win the case in SC.




Main objection to the Proposed “Marriage Laws (Amended) Bill,2010,

Monday, 26 August 2013

RS approves Husband Killer Property Garbing LAW in name of Easy Divorce to Women.

Your hard earned money/property does not belong to you.


The Bill allows parties to file for divorce on the ground of "irretrievable breakdown" of marriage, but if Husband file divorce wife can oppose the same on the ground of "Financial Hardship" but if Wife file Divorce Husband can't oppose it, plus wife can claim Property/money, Child from husband irrespective the Fault of her or Husband.

Rajya Sabha on Monday approved a proposal to make divorce a Husband killer LAW for Husband as it provides for the wife getting share in the husband’s immovable/movable property after “irretrievable breakdown” of marriage irrespective the fault of husband or wife.

The Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill also seeks to empower the courts to decide the compensation amount from the husband’s inherited and inheritable property for the wife and children once the marriage legally ends.
The Bill allows parties to file for divorce on the ground of “irretrievable breakdown” of marriage. Both parties have to live apart for at least three years before filing for such a petition.

Provisions have been made to restrict grant of a decree of divorce on ground of “irretrievable breakdown” of marriage if the court is satisfied that adequate provision for maintenance of children has not been made consistently with financial capacity of the parties to the marriage.

Also, the wife has the right to oppose the grant of a divorce on the ground that the dissolution could result in grave financial hardship, but no such provision made for Husband, Kapil Sibal totally ignored that as per NCRB data every year more than 65000 married men ending their life.



Replying to a debate on the bill, Law Minister Kapil Sibal said it is “a historic peace of legislation” in a patriarchal society like India where women, who constitute 50 per cent of the population, own only two per cent of the assets ( A big lie, no such data provided), without any authentic data, but failed to reply how husbands are responsible for that? Girls parents/brothers does not give the property/assets to their daughter/sister, so want to punish the Husbands?

In India 10% people hold more than 90% property, does that mean Government will snatch the property from rich and give to poor? He forget to mention in India more than 80% Husband also does not have a own residence, who will give home to them?

He said the divorce is “gender neutral” as either the wife or the husband can seek divorce. However, the right over property/Child will not be gender neutral as wife can lay claim on husband’s immovable/movable property and also run away with Child.

During discussions, several MPs across party lines, even a Congress MP, suggested the Bill to be made gender neutral and should not be confined to Hindu marriages only.But their numbers fall Flat as BJP & Congress Join hands to pass at the time of voting.

The Bill seeks to amend Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Mr. Sibal, however, noted that the legislation is in context of Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act, a couple has a choice to get registered under the Special Marriage Act.

He said it would be the courts that would decided about the division of property post divorce.
“We have to trust our judges...Judges...will decide what (amount of) property will given to women,” he said.
The Minister, however, said there was no amendment which works against women and works in favor of men.

He said the Members of Parliament should show that they are on side of women in a patriarchal society let pass the LAW be Unfair/Biased, we should not worry at all.

Earlier, Najma A. Heptulla (BJP) said divorce is considered a taboo in India and efforts should be made to ensure that family structure remains intact.

She accused the government of not doing anything for the 10 crore women belonging to Muslim community. She promised BJP’s support to any legislation for betterment of Muslim women.

She also said there should be only one law for all women in the country.

But BJP had not opposed the Bill during Voting, is a clear evidence that both BJP & Congress Join hands to make this Husband killer law .

As per the statement of objects and reasons of the bill, Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act have proved to be inadequate to deal with the issue where there has been irretrievable breakdown of marriage and therefore the need was felt for the amendments.

Supreme Court too had pointed out the necessity to introduce irretrievable breakdown of marriage and mutual consent as grounds for grant of divorce in all cases to reduce the litigation , so that both parties can move on in their life with peace.

“Having regards to the recommendations of the Law Commission of India and the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court...it is proposed to amend the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the Special Marriage Act, 1954, so as to provide for irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground of divorce thereunder subject to certain safeguards to the wife and affected children,” the statement said.

But Mr. Kapil Sibal failed to reply how such law is going to reduce litigation, when the cases like CRPC125, Section25, 498A , DV act, Child custody is not decided at the time of issue the divorce degree?

The Law Minister said husbands too can move Section 25 to claim maintenance from wife, but failed to explain, as per section 25 wife also can claim maintenance from Husband, then why he put 13F as a special provision for Wife , where as whole world use the word Spouse?

Ram Prakash (Cong), Narendra Kumar Kashyap (BSP), Jharna Das Baidya (CPI-M), Derek O’ Brien (TMC), Arvind Kumar Singh (SP), Renubala Pradhan (BJD), Vandana Chavan (NCP), Bharatkumar Raut (SS) and Gyan Prakash Pilania (BJP) also participated in the discussion.( Link)

So,what to do ?

1. This is nothing but legal terrorism and to stop that the First think to make more and more awareness. So, highlight the danger to all LAW makers MP, Society and Friends. Always demand as per constitution every one is equal in front of law , so the word men/women must be replaced by person and husband/wife must be replaced by spouse.
2. Those are in LAW filed must start collected the LAW of other country of the world and be ready to fight in Supreme court. No country have such biased law in place.
3. Before marriage must engage a Lawyers.
4. Book a low cost Home in some Village area , so that in old age you can have a place to live.
5. The moment you feel any smell of any problem without any second thought dispose-off all your movable or immovable assets .
6. Minimum Saving after marriage , enjoy the life instead of work like donkey and one day die in Heart attack and left huge assets.
7.Come out from all the emotion , today marriage is no longer a emotional bond, all this male haters LAW makers make the marriage a emotionless simple Business deal and a easy money earning business for
wrong people.


This bill also have a disastrous effect on the marriageability of non-working or low income men/women - as all women/men would like to marry high income men/women now. Will the govt. take responsibility
to get these low-income or no-income men/women marriage?

How is this bill useful when it helps high income men/women while at the same time makes the low-income men/women UN-marriageable?

Already in China we witness many unmarried women  protesting on road to seek a man for marriage, force China SC strike down such unfair/biased LAW in Public interest, but will Indian SC Judges have such honesty or power? Have to wait and see.


At the end feel sorry for all future Father less child, as divorce is going to increase in rapid speed, along with high increase of Spouse murder/suicide in India.

Welcome the LAW for Greedy People not for Needy People gifted by Mr. Kapil Sibal, LAW minister of India.


Main objection to the Proposed “Marriage Laws (Amended) Bill,2010,

Does Women safety = Ignore Men safety?


Recently Maharashtra Home Minister assured to all Women Journalist that he will Provide special security  when they are in Job.
Sounds a great idea as a populist measures without going to root cause of why Crime in Society increase?
Go through the Crime Bure report the Crime against men is increasing in rapid speed and more than 75% Murder reported in this country against men only.

Look at the Murder rate of Men vs Women :

Murder:
http://ncrb.nic.in/CII-2009-NEW/cii-2009/Table%203.3.pdf
Male Victims-24,441, Female Victims-8,718 Total Victims-33,159
Culpabale Homicide Not Amounting To Murder (Sec.304 and 308 IPC) During 2009
http://ncrb.nic.in/CII-2009-NEW/cii-2009/Table%203.4.pdf
Male Victims=3,529, Female Victims=753 Total Victims=4282

Now we wonder , can a society provide safety to Women ( Murder/Rape), when in their own society the Men are not safe?

In India the Crime Bure Report summarized the data of Crime against Women,Crime against Child, but they even not provide a direct Link/summarized report Crime against Men, it is you have to summarize your self.


Since 2005 we are providing  the crime data and murder data of NCRB to government, but they always put all to dustbin as the Media never shown any concern of "Safety of Men" as a need of society.
If you go through the report of "Committee to protect Journalist " and click in Gender shows 97% male Journalist Killed vs 3% Women Journalist.
On 24th Aug a Journalist in UP Mr. Akhilesh get murdered , but no Protest form any Journalist association or any candle march by common people of society, not surprised us , as we witness such biased approach in every institutions.
We have Death Penalty punishment for Murder, but the Murder is increasing day by day , which is evident beyond reasonable dought the Punishment increasing does not reduce the Crime.
The solution lies on the probability and risk : When some one do a crime, how much chances he have to get Caught? At present it is 10 to 15% percent on an average.
Recently in FM News people's voice we  heard 90% of Bribe by common Man goes to Police only-and Court staff only even as small as Rs.20 to Rs.20lacks.
Today you can trap any innocent LAW biding Citizen in Criminal cases as easy as ordering Pizza on the other Hand you can't catch the real criminal months/years together and if at all you caught them to punish them need 10 to 12 years and if You innocent to prove it need 10 to 12 years.
So, the root cause failure of  our Criminal Justice system and Police , leads to more /more stringent LAW in the form of Non-bailable , giving the more power to Police/Judiciary, leading to more abuse of Power and bribe industry.

The Failure of Police/Criminal Justice system to provide safety to Indian men never get highlighted or taken any corrective action.

All women activist/media running behind the women Safety issue , like in a desert desperately trying to find a  "Marichika" ( Look for a Water pond far ahead with hope running very fast, but when reach there don't find a drop of water).

History witness a country where your Men is not safe, dreaming women will be safe is nothing but fooling yourself.
Safety/Violence had never be a Gender issue and stop abuse of men with multiple unfair/biased law , as it leads to strength the power of abuse in the hand of Police/Judiciary only , it does not empower the real Victims.

Media friends must understand the Pain of a mother or Sister is not less when they loss their Brother or son or Father.

Thursday, 22 August 2013

Main objection to the Proposed “Marriage Laws (Amended) Bill,2010,

Main objection to the Proposed “Marriage Laws (Amended) Bill,2010, 


We had already submitted our objection and suggestions to parliament committee, but the present law minister totally ignore the same and even tamper the original bill even worse by making new amended, so we request either make the law gender neutral and respect natural justice or roll back the same immediately as this will became a “extraction law” than giving any natural justice to people.



A. The Bill must be gender neutral, if a wife have contribution to husbands property( movable or immovable) , any property made by wife ( movable or immovable) also have husbands contribution, so only Even in USA-Txas law the word used "Spouse" instead of wife or husband, other wise one sided law will create a disharmony, increase of crime, huge litigation in court for property disputes.

B. The benefit of divorce can't be equal to married relationship , as the obligation and responsibility after divorce change to either spouse. Even in 2010 china SC also amended the property division law to belongs to the spouse who made it , as such law made havoc in court cases and people started use the marriage as property earning business than love or care to each others.

C. Proposed Amendment: 13D (1) Where the wife is the respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, she may oppose the grant of decree on ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to her and that in all circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage…..

Our View:

Right to oppose should be given to both parties The word wife to be replaced by the word "spouse".
The line to be added: The Divorce degree will be awarded only when all other cases against each others had been quashed or withdrawn and in future no cases will be filed against each other spouse. Otherwise the basic purpose of this law to reduce the litigation will be defeated.
Like :
There are other provisions of maintenance HMA 24/25, CrPC 125, DV Act, adding another provision is duplication and a tool to harass the husband
Rampant misuse of this section to harass the husbands
As per 13C(2), if she is separated for 3 years, she would have already approached the court in case of financial difficulties.
Another attempt to extort husbands (as in 498a and DV Act).

Our Proposed: “The respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, may oppose the grant of a decree on the ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to them and that it would in all the circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage. All cases pending, between the parties would also be quashed before granting divorce under Section 13C”..All case like 498A, DV Act and other litigations should be quashed before the grant of decree.”

Text of Amendments to the Bill, See item 5:  



D. Proposed Amendment: 13F and 28D:( Special provisions relating to disposal of property in proceedings under 13C)

Without prejudice to any customs or usage or any other law for the time being in force, the court may, at the time of passing of the degree under section 13C on a petition made by the wife, order that the husband shall give for her and children as defined in section 13E, such compensation which shall include a share in his share of the immovable property ( other than inherited or inheritable immovable property) and such amount by way of share in movable property, if any, towards the settlement of her claim, as the court may deem just and equitable, and while determining such compensation the court shall take into account the value of inherited or inheritable property of husband.

Our View :

The word wife and husband to be replaced by spouse which followed by all over world, even in USA-Txas the same is spouse.
If this law passed as per above, for example the wife have 1000 crs ( let it be given by husband also) and husband have only 10 lacks, but as per law, her 1000 crs can't be touched, but the husband 10 lacks to be divided and given to wife? This is totally injustice and against any natural justice System of the world.

The property accrued before marriage, either spouse should not have any right, as there is no contribution of other spouse on that, the contribution to be considered only on the property made after marriage and any claim to others property to be allowed if only the marriage obligation is more than 10 years.

So Our Proposed : 13F and 28D:( Special provisions relating to disposal of property accrued during subsistence of marriage in proceedings under 13C)

"Without prejudice to any customs or usage or any other law for the time being in force, in any proceeding under section 13C, at the time of passing of the degree , the court may on a petition made by "either spouse" order that the "other spouse" shall pay for "her/his" and children as defined in section 13E, as finciancail support such gross sum or share in the movable or immovable residential property towards settlement of property rights as the court may deem it to be just and equitable, "considering the duration of marriage" and any such payment shall be secured , if necessary , by change on the immovable residential property of the other party. For any claim each others spouses residential property, the minimum marriage duration should be considered as 10 years.

E. The law should be equal and must follow the natural justice and stop making assumption that all women born in Raja Harish chandra family and all men born in criminal family.

The person seeking Divorce on "No fault Ground" , should not get the same benefit , who seek the divorce by proving other party fault. A person should not be punished for "No Fault" in the name of easy divorce nor his/her hard earned accrued property movable or immovable should be garbed under any such biased law, which will create injustice and will create more disharmony in society which in result will increase the over all crime in India.

Are new divorce laws anti-men? - YouTube

► 11:39► 11:39