S.O.

S e - Clarion Of Dalit - Weekly Newspaper On Web

Working For The Rights & Surial Of The Oppresse!
"!itor# N$%$R$&$.'.R( )O*.+ issue.,-(( ../0/102/.3

Editorial : AN APPEAL TO HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF
INDIA - MORE IMRAANAS & SHA BANOOS - URGENT NEED FOR
UNIFORM CIVIL CODE

Take recent cases of Maryada Murders or Honour killings , rape cases of women .
Decades old case of rape victim, SMT. Imraana has proved that how inhuman ,
illogical the fatwa & shariat laws of muslim community are. It remindsus of
medieval times. The socalled ardent followers of shariat laws, only force it on
their women folk. The shariat laws with respect to men folk like prohi!ition on
drinking, smoking, adultery,etc & the punishments like pu!lic stoning to death are
not enforced. The muslim men are authorised !y shariat to marry more women !ut
they must look after all their needs as per shariat. They can divorce their wives !y
triple tala" if they are not satisfied with them. This part of shariat is carried out !y
menfolk however the other part of shariat which stipulates paying !ack of dukthari,
woman#s !elongings,her properties all to her after tala" are not at all followed.
The male chauvinists in muslim community are the worst violators of shariat. They
are suita!ly manipulating shariat to supress muslim women. The central
government is also dancing to the tunes to safeguard it#s vote !ank. Take the case
of shaa !anoo during $.M. %a&iv gandhi#s regime. Inspite of supreme court ruling to
pay living e'penses to her !y her e'hus!and, the govt passed a !ill annulling the
S( verdict.
The govt gives su!sidy to ha& pilgrims, does it give the same amount of su!sidy to
kashi pilgrims, !odhgaya pilgrims, !ethleham & )erusalem pilgrims * The women
folk of different religions don#t en&oy same property rights in their parent#s
property. The govt has enacted
various laws which are itself une"ual, illogical & violative of fundamental rights of
citi+ens, all to appease a vote!ank.
,ll religions are !ased on humanity & e"uita!le &ustice, are good, great & lead to
the same supreme power. It is the su!se"uent interpretations which are inhuman.
,ccording to times, the medieval rituals which may !e right at that time, at that
place !ut now inhuman, illogical at this time & at this placeindia, should !e
dropped. The religion must !e within the confines of home. -efore law, every!ody
is e"ual & must !e treated as e"uals, !oth women & men.
Here!y, H%. urges the honoura!le supreme court of india to order the govt of
india to enact uniform civil code within a time frame. ),I HI/D. 0,/D1
M,T,%,M.
2our#s sincerely,
/agara&a. M. % .

Rapd at !"#poi#t $% &at'r-i#-la() *lri*+
ordr to trat 'r '"+$a#d a+ 'r +o#

In a chilling reminder of the Imrana case, yet another young woman from
Mu+affarnagar who allegedly fell victim to her fatherinlaw3s se'ual assault faces
a !leak future after mullahs declared that the hus!and of the victim will !e treated
as her son.
The 45yearold victim alleged that her hus!and has !een working in Du!ai for the
last two years and her fatherinlaw has !een se'ually assaulting her at gun point
since 4678.
She remained silent !ecause he used to threaten to kill her. He also video recorded
his act and threatened to make it pu!lic if she opened her mouth.
.hen she told her hus!and a!out it, he !lamed her for making a false allegation
against his father.
.hen she finally told her parents, they suggested her to take legal action against
her rapist fatherinlaw.
She created ruffles in the local administration and the Muslim community on
Thursday !y moving an application !efore District Magistrate 9aushal %a& Sharma
to arrest her fatherinlaw and allow her to a!ort her sevenmonth pregnancy.
,fter the application !y the victim, clerics &umped into the case and declared that
the hus!and of the victim will !e treated as her son.
,voiding any comment against the fatherinlaw who repeatedly raped and
!lackmailed the victim, Maulana Mohammad /a+ar of )amiat :lamaiHind said;
<,s per the Sharia law, the !a!y in her wom! is her hus!and3s !rother. Her
hus!and must divorce her, even if his father looked at his wife with lust.=
In 466>, Imrana#s case, which was !roadly similar with the clerics declaring her
marriage null and void after she was raped !y her fatherinlaw, had led to a
tsunami of criticism of the mullahs who have !een treading cautiously on inter
personal issues ever since.

Imrana rape case
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Imrana rape case is the case of the sexual assault of a 28 year-old Indian Muslim woman by
her father-in-law on !une 2""# in $harthawal %illa&e in the Mu'affarna&ar district (ttar
)radesh, India *located +" km from ,elhi-. The %illa&e elders and subse/uently, se%eral le%els of
Islamic le&al opinion re&arded Imrana0s marria&e with her husband null, as the 1haria re&ards
sexual relations with both the father and son as incestuous. This sparked nation-wide contro%ersy as
critics ar&ued the case was treated as adultery and not rape.
234224
Contents
2hide4
3 5ape and Islamic rulin&s
2 6rrest of father-in-law
7 Timeline
8 1ee also
# 5eferences
Rape and Islamic rulings2edit4
9n !une 2""#, Imrana, 28 years old at the time, and the mother of fi%e children, was raped by her
:-year-old father-in-law 6li Mohammad.
1oon after she was raped, a local Muslim panchayat *council of elders- asked her to treat her
husband ;ur Ilahi as her son and declared their marria&e null and %oid.
274
Imrana defied the
panchayat0s rulin& and continued li%in& with her husband.
The leadin& Islamic seminary ,arul (loom ,eoband also issued a fatwa
284
or opinion, which /uotes
from <uran 8=22= wa la tankihoo ma nakaha aaba-o-kum, >6nd marry not women whom your fathers
married?, and not distin&uishin& between rape and adultery, said that as a result of her father-in-law0s
act, she should now be treated as the mother of her husband and she could no lon&er li%e with him
e%en thou&h Imrana had not married her father-in-law. 1he was still married to her husband when
she was raped by her father in law therefore the fatwa pro%ided by the panchayat0s disre&ard the
Islamic rulin&s a&ainst rape and the punishment for the rapists. ,ue to such fatwa Imrana is in a way
bein& prosecuted instead of her rapist father in law as she is bein& ordered to lea%e her husband
and start a life with her rapist. The fatwa is a clarification of the rulin& by the %illa&e leaders who
disre&arded the Islamic teachin&s for such cases for the sake of shunnin& Imrana who is thou&ht to
ha%e brou&ht shame to the community by ha%in& sexual intercourse with her father in law.
2#4
This fatwa was based on the 6bu @anifa school of Islamic !urisprudence *@anafi fi/h-, which rules
that on ha%in& sex with a man she marries, a woman has the status of mother to all his children. The
other three schools, Maliki, 1hafi0i, and @anbali, reAect this position
242+4
The 6ll India Muslim )ersonal
Baw Coard also endorsed the fatwa,
284
but opinions were di%ided between the @anafi and 1hafi0i,
24
the
two sunni fi/h0s mostly represented in India.
Bater, the ,eoband seminary denied that it has issued such a fatwa.
2citation needed4
;ur Ilahi continued to stay
with Imrana and said that D2they4 neither sou&ht ad%ice nor counsel from ,eoband. 2They4 ha%e not
raised the issue before clerics.D
6t one point, (ttar )radesh chief minister Mulayam 1in&h Eada% also endorsed the %iew of the ,arul
(loom that she can no lon&er li%e with her husband.
6fter Imrana0s case was hi&hli&hted by the national media, the ;ational $ommission for
Women directed authorities in Mu'affarna&ar to take action.
2:4
The body0s chairperson FiriAa
Gyas asked the (ttar )radesh &o%ernment to punish the &uilty and sou&ht a report on the incident.
Arrest of father-in-law2edit4
)olice re&istered a case under sections 7+ *rape- and #" *criminal intimidation- of the Indian
)enal $ode a&ainst Mohammed 6li and arrested him. )olice also filed a case a&ainst him on 7"
!une 2""# with a medical report and recorded Imrana0s statement before a ma&istrate. The court
had turned down Mohammed 6li0s bail plea on # ,ecember 2""#
In a %ideo recorded by the Muslim )olitical $ouncil of India,
23"4
Imrana *%eiled- says that once she
screamed, Mohammed 6li had run away. 9n bein& asked a&ain, she reiterates that the forceful
attempt was not successful.
2334
@owe%er, the court took a different %iew based on e%idence presented in the trial. 9n 9ctober 2"",
Mohammed 6li was condemned to a prison term of ten years for rapin& Imrana. 6t one point the
defense lawyer sou&ht a leniency based on a&e of the defendant, but this was denied.
2324
The Aud&e
also directed Mohammed 6li to pay compensation of 5s 8,""" to Imrana for rapin& her.
2374
9n the
separate char&e of criminal intimidation, Mohammed ali was sentenced to three years in prison and
fined in 5s 7,""".
Timeline2edit4
$hronolo&y of e%ents in the Imrana rape case=
6 June 2005: 6li Mohammed raped his dau&hter-in-law Imrana.
13 June 2005: 6 local Muslim panchayat declared Imrana0s marria&e to ;ur Ilahi %oid as she
Dhad sexD with her father-in-law and asks her to treat her husband as her son, which means she
would ha%e to stop li%in& with him.
13 June 2005= Mohammed is arrested.
16 June 2005= Mohammed is sent to Audicial custody.
30 June 2005= The police filed cases a&ainst Mohammed alon& with a medical report.
Imrana0s statement is recorded before a ma&istrate.
5 December 2005= The court turned down Mohammed0s bail plea.
30 December 2005= The char&es are framed a&ainst Mohammed.
19 October 2006= The court sentenced Mohammed to 3" years in prison for rapin& Imrana.
@e also recei%ed a three-year term for a separate char&e of criminal intimidation.
See also2edit4
1hah Cano case
References2edit4
3. Jump up ^ DBet0s be fair to ImranaD. Hxpressindia.com. 5etrie%ed 2"32-":-22.
2. Jump up ^ DTahir Mahmood, The le&al fiction behind the contro%ersyD. Tehelka.com.
7. Jump up ^ DWhate%er @appened to... ImranaD. Tehelka. 22 1eptember 2""+. 5etrie%ed 2""+-":-2:.
8. Jump up ^ DText of the <uestion and fatwa on ImranaD. Milli&a'ette. 8, !uly 2""# "2=8" I1T. 5etrie%ed 2""+-":-2:.
#. Jump up ^ DFi&htin& for ImranaD. @induonnet.com. 5etrie%ed 2"32-":-22.
. I !ump up to=
a

b
5asheed Jidwai *2: !une 2""#-. DImrana rape splits Muslim boardD. The Tele&raph.
+. Jump up ^ 1hari/ue *3: 9ctober 2""-. DImrana case updateD.
8. Jump up ^ 6diti Chaduri *2""+-":-28-. DMuslim Women in India 1eek 1ecular !usticeD. womensnews.com.
:. Jump up ^ 234
2dead link4
3". Jump up ^ DT.6. 5ahamani, The Imrana case, published by the Milli Fa'etteD. Milli&a'ette.com. 5etrie%ed 2"32-":-22.
33. Jump up ^ DImrana on %ideo - no rapeD. Milli&a'ette.com. 5etrie%ed 2"32-":-22.
32. Jump up ^ )ress Trust of India *2" 9ctober 2""-. D0;o leniency could be shown in Imrana0s case0D. Indian Hxpress.
5etrie%ed 2""+-":-2:.
37. Jump up ^ D,;6 - India - 6li Mohammad found &uilty of rapin& ImranaD. ,aily ;ews K 6nalysis. 5etrie%ed 2"32-":-22.
Supreme Court calls for common civil code
The Supreme Court has expressed distress over the government's failure in enacting a common civil code to end
discrimination between various religious communities in the areas of marriage, succession and propert and felt that such a
code would help in removing contradictions based on religious ideologies!
The court also declared as unconstitutional section ""# of the Indian Succession Act, "$%&, which applies to Christians alone
and not an other communit and imposes restrictions on the communit from be'ueathing their propert for religious and
charitable purposes b will!
This is not the first time that the apex court has drawn the law ma(ers' attention towards the unfulfilled constitutional
obligation to give effect to Article )) of the Constitution! This provision sas* ++The state shall endeavour to secure for the
citi,ens a uniform civil code throughout the territor of India!''
In the famous Shah -ano case and later in a .udgment relating to a /indu husband converting to Islam in order to legall
.ustif bigam and avoid penal action, the court had hoped that 0arliament would enact a common civil code!
The present .udgment is a fall out of a writ petition filed b a Roman Catholic priest, 1ohn 2allamattom, filed six ears ago
challenging the constitutional validit of section ""# of the Indian Succession Act on the ground of discrimination!
Section ""# sas that a person having a nephew or niece or an near relative cannot be'ueath his propert for religious or
charitable purposes unless the will is executed not less than "% months before his death, or the will is deposited within six
months from its execution to a place provided b law and it remains in such deposit till his death!
1ustice A R 3a(shmanan described the provision as ++undue, harsh and special burden on the Christian testor alone''! Chief
1ustice 2 4 5hare said that the period of "% months could not have been lin(ed to the ob.ect of performing the philanthropic
act! ++As the charitable purposes are philanthropic and since a person's freedom to dispose off propert for such purposes
has nothing to do with religious influence, section ""# treating be'uests for both religious and charitable purposes is
discriminator and violative of Article ") of the Constitution,'' he added!
1ustice 3a(shmanan said despite the 5erala /igh Court declaring the provision unconstitutional as far bac( as "$$#,
0arliament had not removed it and hence the apex court must declare it as unconstitutional!
In another significant observation dealing with the arguments against a common civil code, C1I 5hare said* ++It is no matter
of doubt that marriage, succession and the li(e matters of secular character cannot be brought within the guarantee
enshrined under Articles %& and %6 of the Constitution 7right to freedom of religion8!''

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It has been suggested that The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act
1986 be merged into this article. (Discuss)Proposed since M! "#1$%
Mohd. Ahmed Khan and Shah Bano Begum and
Others
Court Supreme Court of India
Full case
name
Mohd% Ahmed &hn v% 'hh (no (egum And )rs
Decided 23 April 19!
Citation(s) 19! SC" (3) ##
Case history
Prior
action(s)
Criminal "e$ision %o. 32& of 19'9( )adh*a +radesh ,igh
Court
Holding
A -oman has a right to claim maintenance under Section 12! of Cr+C as
the Code is a criminal la- and not a ci$il la-.
Case opinions
Concurren
ce
.. /. Chandrachud (Chief 0ustice)( "angnath )isra( D A
Desai( 1 Chinnappa "edd*( 2 S /en3ataramiah
Laws applied
Code of Criminal +rocedure( 19'3( Indian +enal Code.
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum *3:8# 1$5 *7- 888-, commonly referred to as the Shah
Bano case, was a contro%ersial maintenance lawsuit in India. 1hah Cano, a 2-year-
old Muslim mother of fi%e from Indore, Madhya )radesh, was di%orced by her husband in 3:+8. 1he
filed a criminal suit in the 1upreme court of India, in which she won the ri&ht to alimony from her
husband. @owe%er, she was subse/uently denied the alimony when the Indian )arliament re%ersed
the Aud&ement under pressure from Islamic orthodoxy.
2342242742842#4
The Aud&ement in fa%our of the woman in
this case e%oked criticisms
242+4284
amon& Muslims some of whom cited <ur0an to show that the
Aud&ement was in conflict with Islamic law.
2+4
It tri&&ered contro%ersy about the extent of ha%in&
different ci%il codes for different reli&ions, especially for Muslims in India.
2342:4
This case caused
the $on&ress &o%ernment, with its absolute maAority, to pass the Muslim Women *)rotection of
5i&hts on ,i%orce- 6ct, 3:8 which diluted the Aud&ment of the 1upreme $ourt and, in reality, denied
e%en utterly destitute Muslim di%orcLes the ri&ht to alimony from their former husbands.
2#42:4284
@owe%er,
in the later Daniel Latificase, the 1upreme $ourt interpreted the act in a manner reassurin& the
%alidity of the case.
23"4
Contents
2hide4
3 Cack&round
o 3.3 9pinion of 1upreme $ourt
2 5eactions to the Aud&ment
7 ,ilution of the effect of the Aud&ment
o 7.3 5eactions to the act
8 Bater de%elopments
# $hallen&e to the %alidity of the 6ct
1ee also
+ ;otes
8 5eferences
: Hxternal links
Background[e!t"
In 3:72, 1hah Cano, a Muslim woman was married to Mohammed 6hmad Jhan, an affluent and
well-known ad%ocate Indore, Madhya )radesh and had fi%e children from the marria&e. 6fter 38
years, Jhan took a youn&er woman as second wife and after years of li%in& with both wi%es, he
threw 1hah Cano who was then a&ed 2 years and her fi%e children out. In 6pril 3:+8, when Jhan
stopped &i%in& her 2"" per month he had apparently promised,
2334
claimin& that she had no means to
support herself and her children, she filed a petition at a local court in Indore, a&ainst her husband
under section 32# of the $ode of $riminal )rocedure, askin& him for a maintenance amount of #""
for herself and her children. 9n ;o%ember 3:+8 her husband &a%e an irre%ocable tala/ *di%orce- to
her which is his prero&ati%e under Islamic Baw and took up the defence that hence Cano had ceased
to be his wife and therefore he was under no obli&ation to pro%ide maintenance for her as except
prescribed under the Islamic law which was in total #,8"".
224
In 6u&ust 3:+:, the local court directed
Jhan to pay a sum of 2# per month to Cano by way of maintenance. 9n 3 !uly 3:8", on a
re%isional application of Cano, @i&h $ourt of Madhya )radesh enhanced the amount of maintenance
to 3+:.2" per month. Jhan then filed a petition to appeal before the 1upreme $ourt claimin& that
1hah Cano is not his responsibility anymore because Mr. Jhan had a second marria&e which is also
permitted under Islamic Baw.
2242324
Op!n!on o# Supreme Court[e!t"
9n 7 February 3:83, the two Aud&e bench composed of !ustice Murta'a Fa'al 6li and 6.
GaradaraAan who first heard the matter, in li&ht of the earlier decisions of the court which had held
that section 32# of the $ode applies to Muslims also, referred Jhan0s appeal to a lar&er Cench.
Muslim bodies 6ll India Muslim )ersonal Baw Coard and !amiat (lema-e-@indAoined the case as
inter%enor. The matter was then heard by a fi%e Aud&e bench composed of chief Austice
$handrachud, !an&nath Misra, , 6 ,esai, 9. $hinnappa 5eddy, and H 1 Genkataramiah. 9n 27
6pril 3:8#, 1upreme $ourt in a unanimous decision, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the
Aud&ment of the @i&h $ourt.
2324
1upreme $ourt concluded that Dthere is no conflict between the pro%isions of section 32# and those
of the Muslim )ersonal Baw on the /uestion of the Muslim husband0s obli&ation to pro%ide
maintenance for a di%orced wife who is unable to maintain herself.D 6fter referrin& to @oly <uran,
holdin& it to the &reatest authority on the subAect, it held that there was no doubt that the <uran
imposes an obli&ation on the Muslim husband to make pro%ision for or to pro%ide maintenance to the
di%orced wife.D 1hah Cano, approached the courts for securin& maintenance from her husband.
When the case reached the 1upreme $ourt of India, se%en years had elapsed. The 1upreme $ourt
in%oked 1ection 32# of $ode of $riminal )rocedure, which applies to e%eryone re&ardless of caste,
creed, or reli&ion. It ruled that 1hah Cano be &i%en maintenance money, similar to alimony.
2#42:42842324
$ourt also re&retted that article 88 of $onstitution of India in relation to brin&in& of (niform $i%il
$ode in India remained a dead letter and held that a common ci%il code will help the cause of
national inte&ration by remo%in& disparate loyalties to laws which ha%e conflictin& ideolo&ies.
2324
1ome Muslims felt threatened by what they percei%ed as an encroachment of the Muslim )ersonal
Baw, and protested loudly at the Aud&ment. Their spokesmen were 9baidullah Jhan 6'mi and 1yed
ka'i. They had formed an or&ani'ation in 3:+7 known as the 6ll India Muslim )ersonal Baw Coard
de%oted to upholdin& what they saw as Muslim )ersonal Baw.
2#42:4284284
Reactions to the judgment[e!t"
The Shah Bano Aud&ment, as claimed, became the centre of ra&in& contro%ersy, with the press
turnin& it into a maAor national issue.
2374
The 1hah Cano Aud&ment elicited a protest from many
sections of Muslims who also took to the streets a&ainst what they saw, and what they were led to
belie%e, was an attack on their reli&ion and their ri&ht to their own reli&ious personal laws.
2384
Dilution of the effect of the judgment[e!t"
Main article: The Muslim Women (rotection of !i"hts on Di#orce$ %ct &'()
In the Indian &eneral election, 3:88, Indian ;ational $on&ress had won absolute maAority in the
Indian parliament. 6fter the Shah Bano Aud&ment, many leaders in the Indian ;ational $on&ress,
su&&ested then prime Minister of India, 5aAi% Fandhi that if the &o%ernment did not enact a law in
)arliament o%erturnin& the 1upreme $ourt Aud&ement, the $on&ress would face decimation in the
polls ahead.
2384
In 3:8, the )arliament of India passed an act titled The Muslim Women *)rotection of
5i&hts on ,i%orce- 6ct 3:8 that nullified the 1upreme $ourt0s Aud&ment in the Shah Bano Aud&ment.
,ilutin& the 1upreme $ourt Aud&ment, the act allowed maintenance to a di%orced woman only durin&
the period of iddat, or till :" days after the di%orce, accordin& to the pro%isions of Islamic law. This
was in stark contrast to 1ection 32# of the $ode.
23#4
The 0liability0 of husband to pay the maintenance
was thus restricted to the period of the iddat only.D
2#42:4284234
The D1tatement of 9bAects and 5easonsD of the act stated that Dthe 1hah Cano decision had led to
some contro%ersy as to the obli&ation of the Muslim husband to pay maintenance to the di%orced
wife and hence opportunity was therefore taken to specify the ri&hts which a Muslim di%orced
woman is entitled to at the time of di%orce and to protect her interests.D
23+4
$eact!ons to the act[e!t"
The law recei%ed se%ere criticism from se%eral sections of the society. The 9pposition called it
another act of DappeasementD towards the minority community by the Indian ;ational $on&ress.
23#4
The 6ll India ,emocratic Women0s 6ssociation *6I,W6- or&anised demonstrations of Muslim
women a&ainst the mo%e to depri%e them of ri&hts that they had hitherto shared with the @indus.
This law has been alle&ed to ha%e been brou&ht by then prime minister 5aAi% Fandhi for Muslim
appeasement.
2384
The Charatiya !anata )arty re&arded it as an Mappeasement0 of the Muslim community and
discriminatory to ;on-muslim men and saw it as a D%iolation of the sanctity of the country0s hi&hest
courtD.
2#423:4
The 0Muslim Women *)rotection of 5i&hts on ,i%orce- 6ct0 was seen as discriminatory as it
denied di%orced Muslim women the ri&ht to basic maintenance which women of other faiths had
access to under secular law.
2#4
Makarand )aranAape sees the o%errulin& of 1upreme $ourt %erdict
in Shah Bano case which happened when the $on&ress party was in power, as one of the examples
of the party0s pseudo-secular tactics which allowed Dcynical manipulation of reli&ion for political
endsD.
22"4
Bawyer and former law minister of India, 5am !ethmalani has termed the act as
Dretro&ressi%e obscurantism for short-term minority populismD.
22342224
5aAi% Fandhi0s collea&ue 6rif
Mohammad Jhan who was I;$ member and a minister in Fandhi0s cabinet resi&ned from the post
and party in protest.
2274
$ritics of the 6ct point out that while di%orce is within the pur%iew of personal laws, maintenance is
not, and thus it is discriminatory to exclude Muslim women from a ci%il law. Hxclusion of non-Muslim
men from a law that appears inherently beneficial to men is also pointed out by them.
2#4
@indu
nationalists ha%e repeatedly contended that a separate Muslim code is tantamount to preferential
treatment and demanded a uniform ci%il code.
2284
Later developments[e!t"
The 6ct has led to Muslim women recei%in& a lar&e, one-time payment
2#4
from their husbands durin&
the period of iddat, instead of a maximum monthly payment of #"" - an upper limit which has since
been remo%ed. $ases of women &ettin& lump sum payments for lifetime maintenance are becomin&
common.
2:4
@owe%er it is seen that despite its uni/ue feature of no ceilin& on /uantum of
maintenance, the 6ct is sparin&ly used because of the lack of its knowled&e e%en amon& lawyers.
The le&al fraternity &enerally uses the $r)$ pro%ision while mo%in& maintenance petitions,
considerin& it handy.
23#4
The 1hah Cano case had once a&ain spurred the debate on the (niform $i%il $ode in India.
Ironically, the @indu 5i&ht led by parties like the !an 1an&h which had stron&ly opposed reform of
@indu law in the #"0s, in its metamorphosis as the Charatiya !anata )arty became an ad%ocate for
secular laws across the board. @owe%er, their opposition to the reforms was based on the ar&ument
that no similar pro%isions would be applied for the Muslims on the claim that they weren0t sufficiently
ad%anced. The pressure exerted by orthodox Muslims caused women0s or&ani'ations and
secularists to ca%e in.
2#4284234234
Challenge to the validity of the Act[e!t"
The constitutional %alidity of the Muslim Women *)rotection of 5i&hts on ,i%orce- 6ct, 3:8 was
challen&ed before the 1upreme $ourt in Danial Latifi * %nr #+ ,nion -f .ndia by ,aniel Batifi who
was the lawyer of 1hah Cano in the 1hah Cano case. The 1upreme $ourt tried to maintain a
balancin& act, attemptin& to uphold Muslim women0s ri&hts without addressin& the constitutionality of
&ender and reli&ious discrimination in personal law. $ourt reiterated the %alidity of the 1hah Cano
Aud&ment. The Muslim )ersonal Baw Coard, an inter%enor, /uestioned the authority of the court to
interpret reli&ious texts.
The $ourt concluded that the 6ct does not, in fact, preclude maintenance for di%orced Muslim
women, and that Muslin men must pay spousal support until such time as the di%orced wife
remarries. @owe%er the $ourt held that if the 6ct accorded Muslim di%orcees une/ual ri&hts to
spousal support compared with the pro%isions of the secular law under section 32# of the $riminal
)rocedure $ode, then the law would in fact, be unconstitutional.
23"423+4
Further the 1upreme $ourt
construed the statutory pro%ision in such a manner that it does not fall foul of articles 38 and 3# of
the $onstitution of India. The pro%ision in /uestion is 1ection 7*3-*a- of the Muslim Women
*)rotection of 5i&hts on ,i%orce- 6ct, 3:8 which states that Da reasonable and fair pro%ision and
maintenance to be made and paid to her within the iddat period by her former husbandD. The $ourt
held this pro%ision means that reasonable and fair pro%ision and maintenance is not limited for the
iddat period *as e%idenced by the use of word DwithinD and not DforD-. It extends for the entire life of
the di%orced wife until she remarries.
23+4
PRACTICE OF UNTOUCHABILIT, B, EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
IN INDIA
- VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF DALITS
In india , rich people !elonging to forward castes form educational trusts ,
proclaiming that they want to serve the society !y providing education to all
irrespective of caste or creed. -y this declaration they get (ivic ,menity sites from
government authorities at concessional rates. ?urther they get ta' , duty
e'emptions on materials , machines they import for the educational institution.
However , while admitting students they are purely commercial minded , the
highest !idder gets the seats.

I? ,T ,@@ TH1 SA@1 ,IM A? TH1S1 I/STIT:TIA/S IS (AMM1%(I,@ B
@1T TH1M -1 %1CIST1%1D ,S (AMM1%(I,@ -ADI1S , ,S9 TH1M TA
C1T SIT1S ,T (AMM1%(I,@ M,%91T %,T1S , ,S9 TH1M TA $,2
T,D1S A/
M,T1%I,@S , M,(HI/1S & TH1I% 21,%@2 I/(AM1. 1/?A%(1
MI/IM:M .,C1S ,(T , C%,T:ITI1S ,(T , $.? & 1SI ,(T TA TH1S1
I/STIT:TIA/S .HA ,%1 $,2I/C , $ITT,/(1 TA TH1I% ST,??.
Some institutions like industrial training institutes E I.T.IF , polytechnics ,
engineering colleges & medical
colleges run !y trusts floated !y forward castes lack !asic infrastructure , to teach
students properly , they only appoint staff !elonging to thier castes. Dalits ,
minorities , weaker section people are not at all selected. They don#t pu!licly
advertise for vacancies. They fill all posts with thier own caste people & finally
even get government grant in aid. How * These institutions are getting affiliations ,
yearly approvals form the government , how * actually they should have !een
shut. These trusts want government !acking for ta' e'emptions , lands at
concessional rates ,monetary !enefits , etc , however the same trusts are not willing
to implement the social welfare o!&ectives of the government , !y providing seats
to weaker sections , !y providing appointments to dalits few posts in all category
of positions E not &ust group D dalits are also !rilliant & capa!le of performing all
&o!s, they have proved it F.

Here!y , we urge honoura!le prime minister of india , government of india &
honoura!le chief minister of karnataka , government of karnataka to ;
7. !efore giving lands at concessional rate , ta' e'emptions , to any educational
trusts the government must ensure that the trust must adhere to the social welfare
norms of the government from day one.
4. -efore giving affiliations to educational institutions the govt must ensure , are
the institutions are providing sufficient infrastructure to students *
8. -efore giving grant in aid to any institution , the government must ensure have
the management provided &o!s to dalits , minorities , etc as per norms from the day
one . if not grant in aid should !e
re&ected. Here there is no meaning in giving reservation of &o!s in future
appointments in those institutions , as all the posts are presently filled with forward
castes , there is no e'pansion pro&ects.
So , dalits have to wait for another 86G6 years to get the vacancies in those
institutions after the retirement of forward caste employees , which is not at all
practical or realistic .
G. In karnataka state , numerous Industrial Training Institutes E ITIF have
mushroomed , some don#t even have !asic infrastructure. Still they are running the
show , how * these ITIs run !y forward caste people have appointed only their
caste people to all posts , not even a single dalit is there. Still they have got
government grant in aid , how * we urge honoura!le chief minister of karnataka ,
to look into this & in future to provide grant in aid in aid to only those I.T.Is which
have proper infrastructure & dalits , weaker section employees on their payrolls.
H. To order all educational institutions to make pu!lic announcement of vacancies
in their institutions even though not covered under grant in aid , as they have
already taken sufficient monetary
!enefits from the government.
I. To order all educational institutions , to admit students as per government rates
of fees. Some institutions are fleecing higher fees from the students , !ut are giving
receipts for lesser amount only.
>. If any educational institutions don#t agree with the government norms , those
institutions must !e asked to !e registered as commercial !odies , no ta'
e'emptions , lands at concessional rates ,
allotment of (, sites should !e given to them !y the government.
-y these measures alone poor & weaker section people will get &ustice . you are
aware of merited !ut poor students committing suicides year after year , (1T
fiasco due to their financial ina!ility to &oin medical or engineering colleges.
/umerous similar cases are there with regard to admission to ITIs .
polytechnics. The greed & casteism of these educational institutions is reigning
high. In the positive hope that you will !e kind enough to put an end to this
menace.


ELIMINATE MANUAL SCAVENGING BUT NOT SCAVENGERS
a# appal to 'o#o"ra$l +"pr- *o"rt o& I#dia


I# I#dia) +i#* i#dp#d#* *rtai# a&&ir-ati. a*tio#+ $% t'
!o.r#-#t li/ 0o$ r+r.atio#+ ) r+r.atio#+ i# d"*atio#al i#+tit"tio#+ )
loa# &a*iliti+ ) t* ar 1t#dd to t' $a*/(ard *la++ ) oppr++d popl2
Ho(.r ) t' pr+o#+ ('o 'a. *o#o-i*all%) +o*iall% $*o- +tro#!r o# t'
$a+i+ o& t'+ !o.r#-#t a&&ir-ati. a*tio#+ ar #ot ltti#! t'ir o(#
$rt'r# 3 +*a.#!i#! *o--"#it% to "tili4 t' +a-2 T' politi*ia#+ ar 0"+t
-a/i#! #oi++ a$o"t +"$ *a+t r+r.atio# &or +*'d"ld *a+t+ & tri$+ ) $"t
doi#! #ot'i#!2 A+ a r+"lt ) toda% ( &i#d +o- +"$-*a+t+ & tri$+ o& SC 5 ST
$ttr o&& t'a# t'ir pr.io"+ !#ratio#) +o- ot'r +"$-*a+t+ & tri$+ o& SC
5 ST ar rli#! "#dr "ttr po.rt% ) +o*ial o+tra*i+- ) t*2
A '"-a# $i#! *a# $ i# a *i.ili4d &or- ) 'alt'% - i& ( 'a. +*a.#!r+
to *la# o"r toilt+ ) drai#a!+ ) i& ( 'a. $ar$r+ to *"t o"r 'air+2 T' .r%
+a- popl ('o /p "+ 'alt'% & *i.ili4d ar #ot tratd i# a *i.ili4d
-a##r $% t' +o*it% ) ('% 6 -o+t o& t' to(# -"#i*iapaliti+ ) *it%
*orporatio#+ ar -plo%i#! +*a.#!r+ o# dail% (a!+ (it'o"t a#% +tat"otar%
$#&it+ & ar paid l++ t'a# t' +tat"otar% -i#i-"- (a!+2 .r% to(#+ &
*iti+ i# I#dia ar $"r+ti#! (it' pop"latio# !ro(t' ) 'o(.r t' #"-$r o&
+*a.#!r+ 'a+ #ot $# i#*ra+d i# proportio# to t' !ro(t' o& pop"latio# )
I# -o+t o& t' *a++ t' 1i+ti#! +*a.#!r+ ar o.r$"rd#d (it' t' (or/
load2 ) Mo+t o& t'- ar +"&&ri#! &ro- o**"patio#al 'alt' 'a4ard+ ) ar
d%i#! at %o"#! a!+ la.i#! t'ir &a-ili+ i# t' l"r*'2
Hr$%) ( appal to 'o#o"ra$l +"pr- *o"rt o& I#dia to trat t'i+ a+ a
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION & to ordr !o.r#-#t o& I#dia ) all +tat
!o.r#-#t+ ) +tat"otar% $odi+
72 to r!"lari4 t' 0o$+ o& all +*a.#!r+ ) to pro.id all +tat"otar% $#&it+
li/ ESI)PF) t*2
82 to ta/ all #*++ar% +tp+ to radi*at -a#"al +*a.#!i#! 3 *arr%i#!
'"-a# 1*rta o# 'ad+2
92 to ta/ all #*++ar% +tp+ to prot*t t'ir 'alt' & o**"patio#al +a&t%2

Botto-li# : all t' *iti4#+ ) t' +o*it% -"+t lar# to r+p*t t'ir $rt'r#
('o /p+ t'- 'alt'% ) tid% & *i.ili4d2 :AI HIND2VANDE MATARAM2

,o"r;+ +i#*rl%)
Na!ara02M2R2

Pri.at S*tor 3 It+ o$li!atio#+ to Dalit+
-y %a&indar Sachar
, lively !ut in my view, illinformed, discussion is taking place in pu!lic on the
"uestion of &o! "uota in the pri.at +*tor. The controversy has !ecome sharper
!y the weight of legal opinion of the ,ttorney Ceneral that it was not possi!le to
provide r+r.atio# for S(s and STs in the pri.at +*tor without amending the
(onstitution. I have my r+r.atio# on the correctness of this view. I reali+e that
emphasis is made on &o! "uota possi!ility !ecause of our feudal and hierarchical
social system which puts a &o! in an office whether inpri.at or pu!lic +*tor as
the highest achievement. However, I feel that though emphasis on &o! may !e kept
up, the real !attle dalit+ need to fight is to have a share in the e'panding !usiness
opportunities and that too in proprietary capacity. It is in this conte't that I put
forward an alternative which is immediately availa!le and which can give more
affluence, recognition and opportunities to dalit+ not only for &o!s
in pri.at +*tor !ut for e'panding the opportunities to share in the growth of
Indian economy, and that too without amending the (onstitution.
It is well known that (entral and State Covernments award thousands of crores
worth of pu!lic works and contracts to the pri.at +*tor. ,ll these activities flow
from the Covernment playing a very crucial and significant role either to make a
particular avenue open to the pri.at +*tor like the privati+ation and
moderni+ation of airports, e'press highways $u!lic .orks Department, Delhi
Development ,uthority EDD,F, Delhi and similar ones in num!er of other States
for roads or even construction of Covt. properties which are to !e e'ecuted !y
the pri.at contractors. I am of the view that if proper steps availa!le even under
the present legal set up are taken, a very large segment ofdalit+ population can !e
a!sor!ed and can take !enefit of the rising economy.
It is in this conte't that a reference to :S, legislation called the J$u!lic .orks
1mployment ,ct of 7KK>J would !e apt. That ,ct had a minority !usiness
enterprise clause which provided that 76L Eminority population of :S,F of the
federal funds granted for local pu!lic works pro&ects must !e used !y state and
local grantees to procure services or supplies from !usiness owned and controlled
!y Jminority group mem!ersJ, the latter !eing defined in the ,ct as :nited States
citi+ens who are J/egroes, Spanishspeaking, ArientalsMM.J.
This provision was challenged as denying an e"ual protection clause provided
under the 7Gth amendment of the :S (onstitution Efrom which ,rticle 7G of our
(onstitution has !een adoptedF. The (ourt upheld the validity of the legislation as
it contained provisions designed to uplift those sociallyeconomically
disadvantaged persons to a level where they may effectively participate in the
!usiness mainstream of :S, economy.
The arguments raised as to why the pri.at contractors should !e compelled and
limit their choice in this particular manner as to from where the supplies will !e
received and whom they will su!contract was re&ected, !y holding that Jlegislation
.hen effectuating a limited and properly tailored remedy to cure the effects of
prior discrimination, such Ja sharing of the !urden !y innocent parties is not
impermissi!leJ.
Nuestion of constitutional o!&ection is totally off the mark. ,fter GGth amendment
%ight to $roperty is no longer a fundamental right. Anly $arliamentary legislation
is necessary to deprive a person of it without compensation. It is also well settled
that ,rticle 7K confers no right on an individual to carry on !usiness with the Covt.
B if it wishes it has to !e on terms settled !y Covt. ,s such, no o!&ection can !e
taken !y the pri.at +*tor to the provision making it incum!ent on it to share
proportionately with Dalit+ the funds given to it !y the Covt. or local !ody
agencies.
Similarly, governments could prescri!e conditions as a part of scheme of
disinvestment of pu!lic +*tor. It would then !e permissi!le for the (entral and
State Covernments to provide that out of these amounts the pri.at contractor will
have to ensure that a certain percentage which, to start with, could !e fi'ed at 76L
Ethough it is low as compared to the dalit+ population of 7H7ILF to !e made
availa!le to them either in the matter of su!contracting or e'ecuting some works
or in the matter of employment. Such a course would re"uire not only no
constitutional amendment !ut not even an ,ct of $arliament. The reason !eing that
the Covernment, !eing the spending authority, it is permissi!le for it !y e'ecutive
orders to direct that a certain portion of this money availa!le will !e utili+ed either
for providing employment or for su!contracts to the dalit+. This is what was done
in :S, and which while upholding the said legislation very elo"uently o!served B
Jif we are ever to !ecome a fully integrated society, one in which the colour of a
person#s skin will not determine the opportunities availa!le to him or her, we must
!e willing to take steps to open those doors.J The same principle aptly applies to
the position of dalit+ in our country.
Aur Supreme (ourt has held that Jeconomic empowerment of the poor, in
particular the Scheduled (astes and Scheduled Tri!es, as is en&oined under ,rticle
GI, is a constitutional o!&ective as !asic human and fundamental right to ena!le the
la!ourer, Scheduled (astes and Scheduled Tri!es to raise their economic
empowerment.J
I see no reason why our Supreme (ourt which is far more progressive and poor
oriented than the :S,#s Supreme (ourt, will not re&ect similar challenge. -ut of
course the overriding "uestion still remains B is there a political will and
determination in the (entral and State Covernments to take on the com!ined forces
of -ig -usiness.
I am convinced that it is not only &o!s !ut !usiness opportunities that need to !e
opened to Dalit+, to make a real change in their social and economic set up.


ditd ) pri#td ) p"$li+'d & o(#d $% NAGARA:A2M2R2 < : LIG-8 5 =>7 )
HUDCO FIRST STAGE ) OPP ?ATER ?OR@S OFFICE )
LA@SHMI@ANTANAGAR )HEBBAL )M,SORE -A=BB7= INDIA
*ll : C7 C9D7E8B979 ) C7 EC=B97E8B8
'o- pa!:
'ttp:55+it+2!oo!l2*o-5+it5*lario#o&dalit5Ho- )
'ttp:55!ro"p+2!oo!l2*o2i#5!ro"p5-*lario#-o&-dalit )
'ttp:55-*lario#o&dalit2$lo!+pot2*o-5 )
'ttp:55i#2!ro"p+2%a'oo2*o-5!ro"p5-*lario#o&dalit5 ) 'ttp:55papr2li5&-
79>=C9E>=D )
Follow 4e at
http#00www.fa5ebook.5o40people0Nagara6-'ysore-Raghupathi07.,27,.+3 8
http#00www.a4nesty.org0en0user0naghrw 8
http#00twitter.5o40naghrw 8
Co#ta*t : #a!'r(<%a'oo2*o- ) #a!ara0'r(<'ot-ail2*o- )
'ttp:55(((2a-#+t%2or!5#5"+r5#a!'r(
A M-$r o& A-#+t% I#tr#atio#al