Justice Verma’s recommendations suffer from what we call as “Delusions of Patriarchal Insensitivity” as staunchly conservative patriarchal men like Justice JS Verma, refuse to see female sex offenders as criminals and thus do not recommend legal measures to contain them or prosecute them let alone punishing or deterring them.
These recommendations are very dangerous and if implemented, will make matters worse for male victims of sexual offences and innocent men falsely accused of such offenses, which have to undergo arduous legal trials due to corrupt police force and inefficient judiciary. Such recommendations must be summarily rejected and gender neutral provisions must be welcomed.
Misuse of gender-biased rape law:
The biggest problem with the gender biased laws is their misuse which results in false complaints, false FIRs, false prosecution and even false convictions. Day and in day-out we see false cases of rapes being registered as the recent case of Bhatinda.
These stories are just a tip of the iceberg. The reality is that blind belief on a woman’s word and misandry (social male hatred) results in false rape cases being lodged at the whiff of a moment and an innocent man’s life is ruined and even after acquittal the ignominy of a false prosecution doesn’t go away. Justice JS Verma ought to have displayed sensitivity towards protection of innocents which is completely missing in his recommendations. Such ‘patriarchal insensitivity’ harms men and shakes their trust on the system and this can be a very unhealthy social sign.
Suggestions on Marital Rape:
There are widespread reports of misuse of “Marital Rape Laws” in Western Countries. These laws are misused by the wife to settle scores with husband, to deny the husband the access to children and also to force husband for a higher alimony settlement.
It has to be noted that it will be extremely difficult to prove marital rape and denial of consent inside four walls of bed room. If a woman is sleeping with her husband or partner inside four walls, then that should constitute consent.
So, sex with a partner or spouse during his or her sleep should not constitute as rape.
If Marital Rape law is included in Criminal Law Amendment, 2012, then this law will be misused just like Section 498a of IPC creating a huge burden on the Judiciary and Police.
We suggest complaints of Marital Rape by men or women should be dealt under an amended “gender neutral” Domestic Violence Act, where restraining orders can be passed against persons, who indulge in marital rape.
Sex based upon alleged false promise of marriage is NOT rape:
Refusing to marry a girlfriend after consensual sex in live-in relationship is not rape. It is insane, if consensual sex between two partners today is considered rape tomorrow. If not marrying girlfriend is considered rape, then this is nothing but vindictive attitude to punish a man for just refusing to marry and this takes away the credibility of laws and trust on judiciary in this country.
Not keeping promises, no marriage due to break-ups in live-in relations or divorce is not rape of women. Judges must know; it violates a citizen’s right to liberty, if he has no choice to leave a relationship and refuse to marry after promising it.
Very recently the Delhi High Court gave a very ‘bad judgment’ in this area setting unhealthy social precedence with precincts of male hatred ingrained in it.
The profanity of judges in going overboard to hold the sanctity of the institution of marriage is the reason for ‘insane judgments’ and such social mindsets deserve condemnation. Judges have to understand that consensual sex between two adults cannot be converted to rape at a later instance due to change in circumstances.
Misuse clause cannot be removed:
The government intelligently predicted that Lokpal Bill will be misused against itself, and hence create a misuse clause. With over 74% to 90% of rape cases already being false according to government’s own statistics, a misuse clause in the proposed Sexual Assault bill must be inserted into the sexual assault law wherein an imprisonment of two to five years and a fine should be there. Such strict punishments will only deter false cases and prevent misuse of state machinery to settler personal scores.
If such checks and balances are not put in the laws, then just the way dowry law misuse became “Legal Terrorism”, rape law misuse will become “Legal Holocaust”.
Since sexual assault is a state sponsored law, victims accused falsely of rape and harassed due to the misuse of this law will be paid Rs. 5 lakh and a government job or benefits in the form of petrol pump or a lifelong pension.
Partisan Standards displayed by Justice Verma:
Justice JS Verma has categorically ignored letters sent to him by men’s rights organizations, which have clearly demanded protection against false cases and protection for men who are victims of sex offenses. None of these demands have been reflected in the recommendations released. When men are an equal stakeholder in gender issues, ignoring their issues and concerns will never reduce crime.
If the state goes blind against men, and does not take necessary steps for their welfare then these are partisan stands taken by the state which are unbecoming of a sane state.
Justice Verma even went to the extent of recommending deleting the misuse clause from the pending bill against sexual harassment. Feminists had been long demanding removal of the misuse clause as it was against their interest of ‘trapping’ innocent men and extorting money from them by encouraging women to file false cases. And with Justice Verma speaking it, it is very clear that he chose to become the feminist ‘mouth-piece’ for reasons best known to him.
Justice Verma recommends changing a law to remove misuse clause whereas the Govt. of India has categorically denied any changes in dowry law saying that, “misuse of a law cannot be a ground for its modification”. This clearly exposes the double standards that men in power, suffering from delusions of ‘patriarchal insensitivity’, have against ordinary men.
If innocent men are arrested due to misuse of a law, they are fine with that, however, if a law is formed that protects innocents from misuse of a law, they think it’s too harsh on the women. However, if the woman is a criminal, lies for personal gains and ruins a man’s life, then she must be subjected to the harshest of punishment to protect men’s rights and deter other women from committing crime against men.
I will end this article with a final comment that all the recommendations by Justice Verma must be rejected to prevent ‘legal holocaust’ and the Govt., society and media must realize that false allegations of abuse are an abuse.