SC to hear plea seeking speedy trial in rape cases (19)

New Delhi: Amid growing demand for stricter punishment for offences
against women, the Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear a PIL
for setting-up fast-track courts all over the country for speedy trial of rape
cases. The PIL, filed by retired IAS officer Promilla Shankar, also seeks
suspension of MPs and MLAs who have been chargesheeted for crime
against women. Meanwhile, another bench of Justice P Sathasivam and
Justice Ranjan Gogoi issued notices to the Centre and all the states on
another PIL seeking security measures for women. Filed by advocate
Mukul Kumar the PIL seeks creation of women police stations in every
town to investigate complaints of rape and sexual assault against women
and implementation of UN convention on elimination of all forms of
discrimination against women. "In spite of international agreements, the
denial of women's basic human rights is persistent and widespread. As per
a study, conducted by the Centre for Social Research, 18 women were
tortured every hour in some way or the other across the country," the
petition said. In her PIL, Promilla said no effort was being made for
effective implementation of existing laws for safety of women. "Punitive
actions are being taken only after incidents are reported by media, but no
reformatory or systematic improvements are being made ... People are
getting frustrated by absence of deterrent effect of law on criminals and
innocent people are suffering due to misuse of police power." (Hindustan
Times 2/1/13)
No fast track courts for women in Gujarat (19)
AHMEDABAD: Gujarat is yet to put justice for women on the fast track!
Even as states like Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala and of
course Delhi announced fast track courts for speedy justice to women in
the aftermath of national upsurge against Delhi gang rape, Gujarat has no
courts dedicated to women. Delhi announced six fast track courts for
women, Maharashtra 25, West Bengal 88! Gujarat has not yet woken up to
the fact that the women in the state need such courts for speedy trials and
justice. Advocate Meena Jagtap said fast track courts dedicated to women
with women judges and women public prosecutors should be started on
top priority by Gujarat government for speedy delivery of justice to the
women wronged in the state. "First thing, women especially those who
have been raped feel extremely humiliated and are hesitant to testify
before male advocates and judges. Secondly, I have witnessed in some
cases that judges themselves advised women to work out a compromise.
In such a situation, the case is resolved but justice is not done", said
Jagtap. Nupur Sinha of Center for Social Justice (CSJ) said Gujarat has no
dedicated women court. "Gujarat needs fast track courts dedicated to
women for the simple reason that we have found it difficult to sustain the
interest of the litigants or women survivors or witnesses over a long period
of time. When the case drags on for long years, the victim gets tired of
coming to the court and a compromise is reached due to pressure from the
community or relatives", said Sinha. Legal secretary V P Patel said the
state had begun fast track courts in the year 2001 and the functioning of
these courts were stopped in 2010. Legal eagles said that these were
funded by the central government and were stopped when the funds did
not come. Patel said while there were no special fast track courts
dedicated to women ever in the state, following the Supreme Court
direction, women judges were asked to handle women related cases,
wherever possible. Pradeepsinh Jadeja, minister of judiciary

This is a collection of previously published news and views from the print as
well as the electronic media, whose reference marked at the end of each news
items. Department of Documentation and Library (DDL) of the Indian Social
Institute, New Delhi neither claims to the veracity of the facts in the news nor
subscribes to the views expressed.
Compiled By
Fr. Paul G Documentation
Centre

and law, says that there are 35 women courts or naari adalats which are
under the women and child development department. When asked about
government starting fast track courts especially dedicated to women in
Gujarat, he said, "No such matter has been brought to his office for
consideration". (Times of India 6/1/13)
Wife-beating not accepted social norm, observes SC (19)
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has expressed its anguish over a judgment
delivered by a Karwar sessions court judge, which suggested that beating
wife was a normal facet of life. Describing the judgment as perverse, a
bench of Justices Aftab Alam and Ranjana Prakash Desai asked for
bringing in change in the mindset of judges in order to deal with the
phenomenal rise in the crimes against women. There is a phenomenal
rise in the crimes against women and protection granted to women by the
Constitution of India and other laws would be meaningful only if those who
are entrusted with the job of doing justice are sensitised towards womens
problems, the bench said. The court dismissed an appeal by Vajresh
Venkatray Anvekar, who was fined and sentenced to five years jail by the
Karnataka High Court, for driving his wife Girija to commit suicide in June
2002. Their marriage had taken place in December, 2001. The apex court
said the high court had rightly reversed the judgment delivered by the trial
court, which had acquitted the accused. It, however, pulled up the fast-
track court judge for writing a judgment that suggested occasional slapping
of wife was not that strong a reason for the woman to end her life. The
tenor of the judgment suggests that wife beating is a normal facet of
married life. Does that mean giving one or two slaps to a wife by a
husband just does not matter? We do not think that that can be a right
approach. It is one thing to say that every wear and tear of married life
need not lead to suicide and it is another thing to put it so crudely and
suggest that one or two assaults on a woman is an accepted social norm.
Judges have to be sensitive to womens problems. Perhaps learned
Sessions Judge wanted to convey that the circumstances on record were
not strong enough to drive Girija to commit suicide, the bench said. The
court said that making light of slaps given to Girija, which resulted in loss of
her eyesight, was to show extreme insensitivity. Assault on a woman
offends her dignity. What effect it will have on a woman depends on facts
and circumstances of each case. There cannot be any generalisation on
this issue, the bench said. (Deccan Herald 7/1/13)