Renuka Chowdhury's arguments on DV Bill

Renuka dismissed the criticism that the new Domestic Violence law was to harsh on men. She is determined to destroy the Indian families. According to the poll conducted by Times of India, 87% people believe innocent men will suffer.

Here are some of her arguments.   

“Women live in dangerously self-embracing situations. Even if you see it as a ferocity in the Act or the ambit is too wide, please understand that women are burnt to death, beaten insensitivity”

Do you have a statistical proof that women are living in dangerously self-embracing situation? It is your own views and you don’t have constitutional rights to make laws on the basis of your self-opinionated perception. As far as women are burnt issues are concerned, we already have IPC 498A. Your arguments are lame and unjustified.  

“There’s always need for corrections and amendments in any law as we progress, as a society develops and the need arise. But for what? Hypothetically, before we reach the bridge and cross it if you want me to make amendments, I wont.”

You have crossed all boundaries of sanity. You don’t even know what you are talking about. IPC 498A is misused now. What amendments and corrections have you planned? You said society is developing and hence the law too must change accordingly. What is your action plans to curb the misuse of 498A? Instead of resolving the issue of 498A misuse; instead of providing legal protection to those innocent families who are legally terrorized by the women you are calling ‘victims’, you have come up with yet another draconian law to multiply the suffering of innocent people. More than 600,000 families are legally threatened of false dowry harassment complaint each year. What have you done to stop this legal terrorism? You said we need to correct and amend the laws as we progress and society develops. What corrections and amendments have you planned in IPC 498A?   

To question on whether men should suffer before the Act undergoes changes, she said, “That’s not a bad idea.”

Who made you the Minister of Women and Child Development? You are definitely a male-hater. When you already are a male-hater, then why you are giving lame justifications that woman needs protection. Just say it openly that you brought Domestic Violence law to torture men. What are you afraid of? You are a minister. You can even physically assault a police officer and go scot-free. If somebody is criticizing your Domestic violence law, why don’t you just say that you want all young wives/girlfriends of the country to torture men legally? Just say it. Stop concealing your ulterior motives behind lame arguments and justifications.    

"Any law is better than no law at all" when protecting women are concerned.”

Do you even know the principles of Law? You need to go back to school. First you are saying that women needs protection, you say that men should suffer, and now you are saying that law is better than no law. As per the Constitution of India, every citizen has the Right to Equality (Art 14-18)(1) Equality before the law (ii) Equal protection of the laws, just in case you entered politics without reading the Constitution of India. If you think law is better than no law, then why have you not provided equal legal protection to men under domestic violence bill? Even if you have some personal hatred for men, which is evident and you also confessed it, you still have no rights to pass such law that is violating the constitutional rights of men. According to the Constitutional of India, men have the right to equality before the law, and therefore, your denial is unconstitutional and deserves to be legally prosecuted for violation of the Constitution of India for accomplishing your own personal vendetta by enacting such biased laws and saying that it is for the protection of women.

"What you deem as silly is really not something I've created today. Under the IPC speaking in a vein that is denigrating to the status of women, which removes her from dignity, is very much an act (offence)."

Do you even know the definition of Dignity? Dignity is not gender-specific. It is the quality of the character, values and ethics of a person. Are you saying that men have no dignity at all? Besides, every single man, one time of the other, is brutally nagged and humiliated by the woman in his life, which degrades his dignity. Why is that not an act of offence? According to you, if a man insults a woman, he should be punished, and if a woman insults a man, she should not be punished. Is this how you understand the principles of law?   

"It's over-trivialising and over-simplifying this Act. Please understand, despite all the checks, women are burnt,"

First, how do you plan to check the incidents of women being burnt to death when domestic violence bill has absolutely no clause referring to this issue? Maybe you haven’t read domestic violence bill because you are so much self-engrossed into torturing men, that you missed out the clause of women being burnt to death in domestic violence bill. If you are aware of that, please think a little deeper if you have to deceive people. People know more than you can ever imagine.

"Because of a minute percentage of people who misappropriate an Act are you saying I should not bring an Act?"

Minute percentage? 90% of the cases filed under dowry harassment law 498A are false. According to you, this statistical figure is minute percentage. Is that correct? If you think you want to conceal the truth, then your efforts are going to be fruitless because when so many people suffer from such draconian laws, the common man will come to know what is what. By denying, you are only putting a full stop on you political career. Instead of tackling the present crisis, you are impatiently brought in another biased law that will be misused on an unprecedented scale.   

"We have put in broad parameters and we will see in which direction the law goes."

You will only make sure that the media does not expose the scale on which domestic violence law will be misused. That is your broad parameters. That is what you have been doing in case of 498A misuse. You have already ascertained the direction of the law, which can easily be observed the way it is drafted. Men and innocent families will suffer and that is exactly what you want, and you also confessed it.  

One in six women is raped, murdered, beaten to death, sent into mental asylums. I don't think that is funny."

You may not think it is funny, but whoever reads your opinion will find it hilarious. One in six women is raped? From where did you get this statistics? There is no way you came up with this idea on your own, and if you did, you need to consult a doctor who will cure your paranoia. It is possible that you are considering the conjugal intercourse between married couples as rape. Then why don’t you accuse your own father of raping your mother?  

I cannot accept every divorce has been examined on the merits of the case

You surely need to understand the principles of laws. According to you, the judgment of the judiciary should not be based on the merit of the case. That is what you are saying?    

"I am empowering my women (with) the right to access the dignity to their life. If they have been denied justice in other fora, if they have been given an ex-parte divorce in their absence, if they have had no money to go and appeal in the courts and they are denied their rights and if the husband suddenly declares he's bankrupt and won't give them alimony,"

Empowering women? According to your conduct, it appears that you like to empower women by violating the constitutional rights of men. And you proved it by setting an example of your own self. On January 20, 1993, Assistant Sub Inspector Suraj Mal, posted on the route at Kautilya Marg near Teen Murti on which the Prime Minister
was to pass, had detained Chowdhury's car. You then got down from the car, quarreled with Head Constable Janki Ram, also on duty, and abused him besides giving him fist blows and kicks, thereby, obstructing him from performing his duty. Criminal case was filed against you under IPC 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant) and IPC 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharging of his duty). Is this what you mean by empowering women? Is this how you like to encourage women of the country saying that you’ll torture all men and the law will only punish men?

Honorable Minister of Women and Child Development, Smt Renuka Chowdhury, has eloquently described the way she has effectively engineered the destiny of our Indian Families and Marriage. It is now up to Indian men. Either they try to protect the Indian culture and marriage, or protect himself. If he attempts to protect the culture, the law, prepared by male-hating feminists like Renuka, will ensure that he is bankrupt, humiliated and imprisoned along with his own parents. In this process, these male-hating feminists believe will protect women and also have access to dignity in life. In the name of women empowerment, Men’s constitutional rights are butchered, Indian culture is destroyed and marriage will become extinct.

Damage has been done.    

5:45 AM - Sunday, November 12, 2006