When i got married, i had no idea that a draconian dowry law existed! I suddered when i read the provisions of the law which includes

1. Arrest without warrant
2. The onus of proving the innocence lies with the respondent and not the petitioner.
3. All it takes is a simple complaint from the girl or her relatives. no evidence required.

I think every Hindu who is getting married should be aware of this and know what he's getting himself into. It's blatantly one-sided. I have all the sympathies for the dowry victims but aren't we giving a tool to evil women (and there are many!) to harass their husbands?
Wake up brothers and fight to get this law changed.

By Himendra on Friday, January 14, 2000 - 02:43 am:

Dear Vick

The question raised in your letter was discussed in great detail in my letter dated August 6, 1999 under the title
"Dowry:We pay the best price! Top Bids invited".

I want to reiterate that we are totally opposed to harrassment of innocent husbands and their relatives by unscrupulous people who mis-use dowry laws.

Right in the "First International Conference on Dowry & Bride-Burning in India" held at Harvard University in 1995, we took the position that dowry is a social problem, and law alone cannot stop it.

If you examine the "Six Point Program to Eradicate Dowry & Bride-Burning in India" adopted and developed in our conferences, you will see that we are giving highest importance on social changes and immediate life-saving mechanism so that the life of the bride can be saved. If the constructive social programs and life-saving mechanisms are implemented, grounds will be created to revoke the draconian laws. We are really grateful to people like you who say that "I have all the sympathies for the dowry victims" : we cannot overlook the stance that, whereas in the mis-use of dowry laws, innocent husbands are "harrassed", in bride-burning, an innocent bride is "killed". I hope you will agree that "killed" is irreversible, "harrassed" can be rehabilitated.

We still do not advocate stregthening of dowry laws any further. Stronger the law, greater is the scope of its mis-use. Alternatively, in the Point #5(a) of the "Six Point Program", it is advocated to reform the laws in India to enforce female inheritance, which will ultimately eradicate dowry and bride-burning. Point #5(b) is designed to prevent the death of the bride before it can actually happen by enacting statutory divorce if dowry is demanded. The language of this point is under revision at present. Please send your suggestions.

We are planning to hold the "Fifth International Conference on Dowry and Bride-Burning" on January 27, 28, 29 and 30, 2001 (380 days from today) in New Delhi, for the first time in India. Please send your articles for publication in our Souvenir by June 30, 2000 (170 days from today). Please send your suggestions about the "Six Point Program" appended below. We will to prepare a "Work-Plan" which will be submitted to the Prime Minister of India on January 29, 2001. The "Work-Plan" will be prepared in such a way that it can be used to implement the "Six Point Program" immediately after the Conference.

Working together, we will be able to create a wonderful India, full of love, hope and trust. Clarion calls like "Wake up brothers and fight" will not be necessary

With best wishes to everyone,

Sincerely yours,
Himendra Thakur
Chair, Board of Directors
International Society Against Dowry and
Bride-Burning in India, Inc. (ISADABBI)
(A Tax-Exempt Non-Profit Incorporationin the USA)

Postal mailing address:

ISADABBI
P.O. Box 8766
Salem, MA-01971, USA

TEL: USA-978-462-6159
FAX: USA-978-462-6347
email:


SIX POINT PROGRAM TO ERADICATE DOWRY AND BRIDE-BURNING IN INDIA

(Note: This "Program" was originally adopted on October 2,
1995 at the "First International Conference on Dowry and
Bride-Burning in India" held at Harvard University from
September 30 to October 2, 1995. The discussion on the "Six
Point Program" was started by Dr. Julia Leslie (Dean at the
"School of Oriental and Afican Studies" (SOAS) of London
University) when she pleaded that there must be a telephone
hot-line in the towns/cities of India so that a bride, who
was afraid that she might be killed, could ask for help. The
question came up: who would take the call ? Who will help
her ?? There was a dowry cell in police department, but they
were understaffed. Moreover, police did not have any
infrastucture to provide safe accommodation, free food and
clothing, medical and psychological support, etc. for the
brides. Most of the existing shelter homes had such a bad
reputation that a bride would prefer to die at the hands of
her in-laws than to go to such a shelter. So the question
came up about building respectable, safe and secure
shelter-homes, which started the discussion.

The "Six Point Program" was further discussed and revised at
the "Second nternational Conference" held at Harvard
University in 1996 and at the "Third International
Conference" held at London University in 1997. The following
is a version modified at the "Fourth International
Conference on Dowry and Bride-Burning in India" held at
Harvard University on December 5, 1998.

As it will be seen, the "Program" is still in the process of
finalization. We need feed-back from everyone, particularly
from persons who have any experience in helping any dowry
victim anywhere in India and abroad, so that a
well-organized centralized plan can be formulated which will
achieve the goal with a minimum wastage of efforts.)

1. MAJOR ECONOMIC PROGRAM: LONG TERM PLAN:

1(a) Enforce mandatory education of females for financial
independence and autonomy,
1(b) Introduce a "Service Loan Fund" to provide low-interest
loans to wage-earning males who wish to pay-off their
parents thereby preventing the possibility of parents' claim
of dowry as a compensation of expenses in raising and
educating their sons,
1(c) Originate an "Old Age Fund" in India to finance old
people thereby eliminating their dependency upon their sons.

2. NATIONAL SUPPORT GROUPS: LONG TERM PLANS:

2(a). Organize and operate "Students Against Dowry" mutual
support groups for male and female students and fresh
graduates (i) to promote the resolve of refusal of marriage
if there is a dowry, & (ii) to support their struggle
against parental pressure for demand/acceptance/giving of
dowry.

2(b). Organize and operate "Parents Against Dowry" mutual
support groups of parents (i) who oppose the dowry system, &
(ii) whose daughters have been victims of dowry.

3. RESEARCH AND MASS COMMUNICATION: LONG TERM PLAN:

3(a). Promote research to identify and diagnose the dowry
problem in India, hold interviews, group/panel discussions,
meetings, seminars, conferences, internet discussions, and
recommend legal, psychological, spiritual and social
remedies to eradicate the evil of dowry and bride-burning.

3(b). Promote mass communication and education programs to
publicize anti-dowry ideology through drama, music, movies,
radio and television programs, books, periodicals, journals,
handbills, and other audio-visual media.


4. MICRO-ECONOMIC APPROACH: LONG TERM PLAN:

This item will be developed to diagnose the dowry problem by
micro-economic studies and recommend ways and means to
combat the subtle micro-economic forces like demand, supply,
greed, etc. which sustain the dowry system.

5. LEGAL APPROACH: LONG TERM PLAN:

5(a). Reformative Law: Reform Indian legal system to enforce
a daughter's inheritance rights to the estates of her
parents, forefathers and other ancestors.

5(b). Preventive Law: Enhance Indian legal system to enforce statutory divorce as soon as dowry is demanded, and enact legal provisions for safe exit of the bride from the house of her perpetrators.

6. IMMEDIATE LIFE-SAVING MECHANISM:

6(a). Construct dignified, high-rise, secured and protected
buildings in a number of towns/cities in India and operate
"Job Center for Dowry Victims" equipped with telephone
hot-lines, attended by speciaists trained to handle distress
calls, where a dowry victim will receive effective security,
respectable accommodation, food and clothing, legal
protection, medical care, psychological and spiritual care,
sports & recreational facilities, study material and a
job-oriented training till she is qualified to find a job
and qualified to lead a financially independent life.

6(b). Construct dignified, high-rise, secured and protected
buildings for financially independent, working women.

[END OF THE SIX-POINT PROGRAM]

By Kishore on Saturday, January 15, 2000 - 07:02 am:

The following article appeared in The India Monitor (Jan 9 - Jan 16, 2000 issue) Vol X, No. 464 on p.16.

-

Ambati family acquitted in dowry harassment case

The Ambati family, which was embroiled in a dowry-harassment case in India in November 1995, has now been acquitted of all the charges in this case. Kolar Gold Fields sessions judge K.S. Venkoba Rao pronounced the order of acquittal on April 28, 1999.

Dr. Jayakrishna Ambati and his family were accused by his former wife Archana of taking Rs. 50,000 (US $1,200) in dowry and of mental & physical abuse. The couple was married in June 1995 in Bangarpet, Karnataka and came to the United States shortly thereafter, but Archana returned to India in July.

However, she did not file a police complaint until 4 months later, in November, coinciding with the well-publicized visit of the Ambati family to Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh to receive the Raja Lakshmi Foundation award. There they were taken into custody by Sub-Inspector T. Konappa Reddy of the Bangarpet police.

During the course of the trial, which lasted over 3 years, Konappa Reddy, also the investigating officer, admitted that the police had not ascertained the veracity of the complaint, or investigated the reason for the 4 month delay in filing the case, or interviewed any of the witnesses prior to the arrest.

Under cross-examination he also acknowledged that no permission from superior authorities was obtained to cross state lines and arrest the accused. He also admitted that the U.S. Embassy was not informed of the arrest of the Ambati family, who are American Citizens, as per the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

Although the initial chargesheet listed over 20 witnesses, only 2 of the material prosecution witnesses appeared in court during the trial. Even Archana’s mother and sister, who initially provided statements to the police did not testify.

At the trial these two witnesses, B.N. Siddananjappa & K.R. Reddappa, recanted their earlier statements and testified that they did not witness any demand of dowry by the Ambati family. Assistant-sub-inspector H. Munivenkataiah who initially took the statements of the witnesses, stated under cross-examination that none of the witnesses told him that dowry was demanded by the Ambatis. Also the prosecution did not provide any medical or other corroborating evidence of physical or mental abuse.

In an unrelated twist, Konappa Reddy is himself now facing murder charges for the July 1997 custodial death of Mr. Gopalappa, who was accused of stealing Rs. 60 of tomato seedlings, in the Bangarpet police station. Konappa Reddy absconded and was a fugitive for several weeks before surrendering to the authorities.

In October 1996, Kolar sessions judge K. Sathyamurthy Holla discharged Dr. Balamurali K. Ambati from the case and dismissed all charges against him for lack of prima facie evidence. Although the state of Karnataka appealed this decision, Justice L. Sreenivasa Reddy of the Karnataka High Court upheld the discharge in April 1998. This decision was appealed by Archana but the Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeal earlier this year.

During the course of the trial the Ambatis produced a tape in which Nanda, the father of Archana, demanded US $500,000 to drop all the charges. Although the prosecution opposed the production of this audiocassette, Justice Narayan of the Karnataka High Court ruled that such evidence was admissible in February 1999. Swiftly thereafter, Archana wrote to the Ministers for Home Affairs and Law & Parliamentary Affairs that she was “unconditionally withdrawing” all charges against the Ambati family.

The Ambati family feels that although the courts have vindicated them after almost 4 years, the victory is bittersweet. Although Drs. Jayakrishna and Balamurali Ambati and their father Dr. Muralimohan Rao were allowed to leave India and return to India in January 1996, their mother Mrs. Gomathi was not permitted to do so. Despite 3 separate Karnataka High Court rulings that the trial should be completed within 3 months, the case dragged on, and the family was separated for more than 3 ½ years. In addition, Dr. Balamurali Ambati lost 2 years of his professional career because he had to wait until 1998 to commence his ophthalmology residency at Harvard, which he was supposed to join in 1996.

The Ambati family is well known in the New York area for their social and community service. For the last 10 years, they have been conducting free weekly academic classes for hundreds of middle and high school students. Also, they have established a charitable educational foundation, the Ashtavadhani Vidwan Ambati Subbaraya Chetty Foundation, which recognizes and rewards talented students in India and the U.S. Since 1991, this foundation has conducted talent mathematics competitions in New York and in India and distributed awards totalling thousands of dollars.

They believe that the close police ties of Nanda, a former honorary Home Guards Commandant, were responsible for the brazen actions of the police. The case achieved tremendous sensationalism because of the celebrity status of Dr. Balamurali Ambati, who at 17 became the world’s youngest graduate in 1995. However, little press coverage was given to his discharge or to his family’s subsequent acquittal. The Ambatis feel that this case is a prime example of how the Dowry Prohibition Act can be abused by unscrupulous families to extort innocent families, especially NRIs. They also believe that NRI organizations and the Indian government should take notice of the growing epidemic of false dowry harassment cases filed against NRIs and take steps to curb the spiraling abuse of this law.

By Anonymous on Saturday, January 15, 2000 - 07:07 am:

Will this Himendra guy stop pasting h is 6 year plan everywhere?

By Ranbir on Saturday, January 15, 2000 - 07:19 am:

Thanks to you all specially to Kishore and Vick for posting very informating posts. I also thank to the editors for starting this very informative discussion.
I do have serious reservation on Himendra's movement which for sure he is using to collect funds, which is very common as people keep making noises for social causes and in reality they have their own interests. Does Himendra knows this serious abuse by many families where men and innocent people are being subjected to harassment.

I request the editor to remove these fake programmes and appeals for funds and making conferences in Western countries. There are more than thousand organisations all over India which are working to create awareness among ignorant people.

By Himendra on Sunday, January 16, 2000 - 02:36 am:

Dear Friends,

I received an email letter from Dr. Jayakrishna Ambati giving me a copy of the article published in the "India Monitor" (Jan.6 - Jan.16, 2000). I have already replied to him as follows:

"Dear Dr. Ambati,

Many thanks for sending the article under reference. I am sending its copy to Dr. Werner F. Menski, Faculty of South Asian Law, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), London University, who is a Board Member of our Society. Please send me your postal mailing address. We will be in touch with you as the discusion proceeds.

I also request you to give me the postal mailing address of "The India Monitor" so that we may correspond with them.

With the best wishes,

Himendra Thakur"


Unlike Vick, Kishore, Anonymous and Ranbir, Dr. Jayakrishna Ambati, a professional man like myself, gave me his email address and I could reply to him.

I had to post a detailed reply to the letter of Vick in the Hindustan Discussion because I did not have even his email address. In that reply, I explained the stand of the International Society Against Dowry and Bride-Burning in India, Inc. (ISADABBI) on the issue of mis-use of dowry laws in India.

When I find that Anonymous is annoyed to see the "Six Point Program", I am not surprised. There are many people who want to talk, but do not want to do anything. If they see a plan of work, they get annoyed. The Editors of Hindustan Discussion and myself and everybody else know about them, and we live with them, they are our brothers and sisters, and I pray to God that they will change some day and do something to help the cause.

As for Ranbir, who also decided to hide behind anonymity by withdrawing his email address, I am sorry he thinks about "Himendra's movement which for sure he is using to collect funds,which is very common as people keep making noises for social causes and in reality they have their own interests." Please note that I am not trying to collect funds. The funds needed will be to meet the expenses of the Conferences which you will have to pay if you want to attend the conference. We are trying to discuss the "Six Point Program" (abbreviated as "Program") in the conferences, change it, edit it, revise it, so that we may create a practical solution to the abominable crime of dowry and bride-burning in India, and submit it to the Government of India for implementation. Unfortunately we cannot depend upon people who do not come up with any suggestion or who keep on hiding behind the Internet. I appeal to them to come forward and help the cause by joining the discussion. IF dowry and bride-burning is stopped in India, the dowry laws will not be necessary, and Vick, Kishore, Anonymous and Ranbir will not have to worry about the mis-use of dowry laws.

As for Ranbir's question "Does Himendra knows this serious abuse by many families where men and innocent people are being subjected to harassment," I politely reply that I know, and I have already started discussion on this matter. The matter was thoroughly discussed in the "Fourth International Conference on Dowry and Bride-Burning" held at Harvard University on December 5, 1998, based on a paper published in the "Souvenir" of that Conference. We have received another paper on the subject of "Mis-use of Dowry Laws" which will be discussed in the "Fifth International Conference" to be held in India International Centre, New Delhi, on January 27, 28, 29 and 30, 2001. Please help us to meet the expenses of holding these conferences. I once again reiterate that the mis-use of dowry laws will stop 0NLY IF dowry laws are abolished, which will happen IF dowry and bride-burning is stopped in India. Right now, it is estimated that about 25,000 brides are "killed or maimed" every year in India over dowry disputes, a number that exceeds the UN estimate of 21,000 civilians "killed or maimed" every year in land mine accidents all over the world.

As for Ranbir's "request the editor to remove these fake programmes and appeals for funds and making conferences in Western countries. There are more than thousand organisations all over India which are working to create awareness among ignorant people", I can only ask how did he know these programmes are fake ? I shall be grateful if he will please point out the defects of the "Program" and suggest revisions so that we can improve the "Program" and prepare a real, practical "Program". Appeals for the funds are now limited to the expenses of holding the conferences, as I stated earlier. "Making conferences in Western countries" was imperative because, people who offered to host the conference in India in 1995, 1996 and 1998 backed out in the last minute and we had to hold it outside. There is a tacit social support for dowry and bride-burning in India and it is very difficult to save the bride. Right now, we are seeing growth of a tremendous support for the victims of mis-use of dowry laws, but still there is a little support for the estimated 25,000 brides who are "killed or maimed" every year in India over dowry disputes.

I appeal to my countrymen to adopt a judicious approach, and work for removal of the fundamental evils like dowry, son-preference, etc., so that we may bring an end to all kinds of suffering ... whether it be due to dowry or due to mis-use of dowry laws ... and go forward to build a beautiful India, full of love, compassion, faith and trust.

With best wishes to everybody,
Sincerely yours,
Himendra Thakur
Chair, Board of Directors
International Society Against Dowry and
Bride-Burning in India, Inc. (ISADABBI)
(A Tax-Exempt Non-Profit Incorporation in the USA)

Postal mailing address:

ISADABBI
P.O. Box 8766
Salem, MA-01971, USA

TEL: USA-978-462-6159

By Clare Fazal on Friday, January 21, 2000 - 01:33 pm:

Hello everyone,
I am presently researching a legal paper at the School of Oriental and African Studies, London, England. The subject of my research is the misuse of dowry legislation, primarily by women and their families to the detriment of men. While I in no way wish to distract attention from the horrific tragedy of India's burning wives, I feel that if measures to prevent the evil of dowry are to be effectively implemented and utilised by those who need their protection, they must be used appropriately and not as a tool for financial gain or victimisation. While such legislation is abused, the available protective laws become a mockery and their reform increasingly unlikely. Real victims of dowry abuse will only suffer further as their claims will be cast into doubt. Faith in public measures whether legal or social will not be achieved while their misuse is so likely.

I look forward to reading further comments in this discussion and invite anyone with information in this field to email me directly or alternatively to post a reply on this site.

Regards,
Clare

By kk on Friday, June 23, 2000 - 07:27 pm:

To
Himendra Thakur
Chair, Board of Directors
International Society Against Dowry and
Bride-Burning in India, Inc. (ISADABBI)
(A Tax-Exempt Non-Profit Incorporationin the USA)

the Fact is that women who commit suicide are also termed as killing whereas in all these cases its the womens family who has harassed the couple , the girl always has the easy way out of moving out of the family , for she always has a Father/Mothre to bank upon , but after marriage the boy is stuck with a non-working marriage and slap of dowry charges if thing turn ugl y and has no way to get out , if he asks her to move out its harassment , either way he's stuck , when girls father is asked to write a dowry list they say why the need , but later slap a dowry charge and accuse others , wheras you are responsible for your own actions and should not blame others and seek easy way out for the only way out then is suicide/death only.

By kk on Friday, June 23, 2000 - 07:36 pm:

To All

1)Does Education provide Financial support , its a fallacy. There are more graduate jobless than illeterates for they do any work to survive , wheeas graduates refuse to do low paying jobs .Illeterate women married to good persons are more happy than Literate women going through the grind , it's all where you search happiness.

2)Women should not be made inheritor in iether case and also allowed to ask for maintenance from husbands,
that would be gross injustice and would break the fabric for women move out from house whereas men stay on so whereas women can be made party to money but never in property which they leave behind , only in case where they opt to stay on the property should they have their share else if she moves out of the place she cannot claim the share and should forfeight to the others.

Social issues are very complicated and instead of solving it could very well eacalate it from husbacd-wife quarrel it could well become a brother-sister-father-mother quarell .

By Jat Punjabi on Monday, June 26, 2000 - 07:38 pm:

Interesting news in today's Tribune:

By Kishore Babu on Wednesday, July 12, 2000 - 02:06 am:

There is a silent but spiraling epidemic - fradulent dowry harassment cases.

The January-February 1999 issue of MANUSHI (No. 110), "a journal about women and society", (http://www.freespeech.org/manushi/110/vimochana.html) contains an interview with Celine Suguna of Vimochana (Bangalore), perhaps one of the most rabid feminists in India. Her statements are quite telling, if somewhat surprising:

"What we regret most is the misuse of the strict anti-dowry laws. Ironically, as a women’s organisation, we were in the forefront in demanding such legislation. One visit to the Bangalore Central Jail and its gross misuse becomes evident. We found that out of 30 cases, eight pertained to dowry deaths and in each such dowry case, at least six or more members of a family have been jailed. There are too many trumped-up charges. There are cases where the girl has died at her parent’s house and it was made out to be a dowry suicide case."

Madhu Kishwar writes in the introduction to this interview:

"Vimochana's experience in Bangalore also confirms Manushi’s experience in Delhi that, as part of complex domestic disputes, a few women are beginning to misuse against innocent men many of the laws enacted (especially the provisions of section 498) to protect women victims of domestic violence.

This is an early warning for the women’s movement which if ignored is likely to produce a severe backlash."

The newspaper article "Most dowry cases are not truly so " which can be seen above in this board also contains further evidence of the growing nature of this egregious epidemic.

I have presented earlier an article from The India Monitor "Ambati family acquitted in dowry harassment case" regarding one of the more famous cases in this regard.

With regard to this case, our ubiquitous friend, Himendra Thakur, was quoted in India West (June 14, 1996, v.21, n. 31, p. A1) that his group (ISADABBI) was "currently trying to raise money to help Archana Ambati ... try her case in a U.S. court, instead, since the alleged crime occurred in New York. ... Thakur said that since the alleged crime occurred in the U.S., the Ambatis should be tried in New York. Besides, he worries that now that they are safely back in their adopted homeland, there is a good chance they might refuse to obey summons from the Indian court.

Trying the case in the U.S. will be expensive, noted Thakur, who is planning to help Archana do it anyway. He is hoping the Indian American community will help."

Perhaps Thakur did not know that at that time, Ambati's mother was not permitted to leave India, being held virtually as a hostage to ensure the return of the remaining family members. Nevertheless, what is most interesting is that Archana never came to the U.S. to try to file a case. So how much money was actually raised for this cause and how was it (mis)appropriated. Particularly since ISADABBI is a tax-exempt organization, some transparency on this issue would be desirable.

On a related matter, Chetan Chauhan, the famed opener with Sunil Gavaskar, has been charged with dowry harassment (http://www.india-today.com/ntoday/newsarchives/100/7/5/n24.shtml)


Chetan Chauhan summoned in dowry harassment case


New Delhi, July 5: A Delhi court has issued summonsto former Test cricketer and member of parliament ChetanChauhan for allegedly harassing his wife for dowry.

Metropolitan magistrate Shail Jain, taking cognizance of a chargesheet filed by Malviya Nagar police, issued summons to Chauhan asking him to appear before her on July 12, the next date of hearing. Police had filed the charge sheet against Chauhan in March this year, four years after registration of the case following a complaint filed by his wife Anita Chauhan.

The trouble in the family is said to have started soon after their marriage in 1978 and the former Test cricketeer had filed a petition in a court in Tis Hazari for annulment of the marriage. The charge sheet has been filed under various sections of the IPC including 498(a) (harassment for dowry), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 506 (criminal
intimidation). (PTI)
-

Now, none of us knows what happened - BUT how on earth can you claim dowry harassment 18 years after marriage!

This seems to be fad. We hear of these things when it affects famed personalities, but there are countless other suffering in anonymity. When are all these dowry harassment pitbulls going to cry foul on both sides of the ball, or do they believe in an eye for an eye?

Kishore Babu

By Himendra Thakur on Wednesday, July 12, 2000 - 07:30 am:

Dear Mr. Kishore Babu,

By accusing that ISADABBI has (mis)appropriated money raised for Archana, you have commited libel. You are doing this by hiding behind the Internet. If you have enough courage, please give me your postal mailing address so that my attorney can serve legal notice on you.

As for the Ambati case, I received a letter from Dr. J. Ambati in January 2000 where he referred to the report in the "India Monitor". I immediately requested him to send me the postal mailing address of this journal so that I may write to them about a few details of their report. I have not heard from him so far.

It is a fact that in 1996, after receiving a letter from Archana, I tried to raise funds to help her fight her case. I am sorry that we could not raise any funds for this cause and we could not help her.

As for mis-use of dowry laws, I have made it clear many times that ISADABBI is strongly opposed to any harrassment of innocent husband and innocent members of a bride's marital family by mis-using dowry laws. Right in the "First International Conference on Dowry and Bride-Burning in India" held at Harvard University in 1995, Dr. Werner F. Menski of London University pointed out that these are social evils, and law alone cannot stop these evils. A "Six Point Program to Eradicate Dowry and Bride-Burning in India" (abbreviated as "Program") was adopted at this Conference, where emphasis was placed on social reform rather than strengthening the law. The "Program" was further developed in the "Second", "Third" and "Fourth International" conferences held at Harvard University and London University, which includes social reforms like mandatory female education so that women can be financially independent, support-groups for dowry victims, social security system so that parents need not depend upon their sons, research and extensive education by audio-visual media to achieve change of attitude in the society, deep research into micro-economic forces that sustain the dowry system in India, introduction of female inheritance as an alternative of dowry, construction of apartment buliding for working women, and finally, construction and operation of "Job Centre for Dowry Victims" as an immediate life-saving mechanism where a dowry victim will find respectable accommodation and a job-oriented training.

In response to recommendations by National Commission for Women (NCW) that dowry laws should be strengthened, I have written on page 213 of the book "South Asians and the Dowry Problem" (published by Trentham Books of England in 1998) that "Every law has its loophole. The stronger the law, the greater the scope of its misuse. Although we agree with the NCW that the Dowry Prohibition Act should be strengthened, we are concerned about the mis-use of the law, which may bring suffering to innocent people." In the "Fourth International Conference" held at Harvard University in 1998, ISADABBI accepted presentation of two papers that criticized mis-use of dowry laws. Instead of legal means, ISADABBI strongly recommends social means of stopping the abominable crime of dowry and bride-burning in India where 25,000 brides are "killed or maimed" every year over dowry disputes, a number that exceeds the annual UN estimate of 21,000 civilians "killed or maimed" in land-mine accidents all over the world.

Dowry and bride-burning is a deep-rooted social evil. Our job is to stop this evil. The evil cannot be stopped only by taking the side of the victims of mis-use of dowry laws where innocent people are harrassed. The evil can be stopped by implementing the plans and programs. I invite you and Dr. Ambati and everyone else to examine the "Six Point Program", send your suggestions, revise it if necessary, and form your own Associations to implement these plans and programs. You do not have to donate any money to ISADABBI, but please do something yourself. The dowry laws will become unnecessary when these plans and programs will be implemented. Like you have shown sympathy to the victims of mis-use of dowry laws, please also show sympathy for the innocent victims of dowry. These are all our people : we should do whatever we can to turn India into a beautiful country, full of love, hope and trust.

I reiterate my request to you to form your own Association to stop dowry and bride-burning in India. You do not need ISADABBI.

I shall eagerly await to receive your positive reply.

Yours truly,
Himendra Thakur
Chair, Board of Directors,
International Society Against Dowry
and Bride-Burning in India, Inc. (ISADABBI)

Postal mailing address:
ISADABBI
P.O. Box 8766
Salem, MA-01971, USA

By Hurt Male on Wednesday, July 12, 2000 - 07:36 pm:

Melanie Phillips, senior journalist in The Sunday Times, exposes the great conspiracy against men; the victims of a sexism that is not only legal in Britain today, but mandatory.

"ONE of the many mysteries of our age is why the British establishment has declared open season upon half the human race.

Men are being systematically robbed of their reputation, their children and their purpose in life.

The people responsible for this sexual warfare are sober women and men in suits—pin-striped, rather than boiler—not to mention wigs and gowns.

If what is routinely thrown at men was directed at any of our fabled victim groups —women, black people, gays—society would stand condemned of the most vile prejudice, discrimination and even persecution. Yet the vast majority of people either don't know how the dice are being loaded against men or, if they do have an inkling, think deep down (or not so deep) that, well, they really do deserve it.

You think this is exaggerated?

Consider the review of sexual offences which is about to be published. Through judicious leaks, the government has indicated that it wants to toughen up the rape law because not enough men are being convicted. So it intends to skew court proceedings against them to make them less able to defend themselves against a prosecution.

Just think about that for a moment. Suppose the government said, for example, that not enough women were being convicted of shoplifting so it was going to make it more difficult for them to mount a defence. Unthinkable, isn't it? That's because the implication that women were naturally shoplifters would be preposterous, that artificially inflating the number of convictions for shoplifting to fit this false stereotype would be grotesque, and that it could only be done by junking our most precious legal maxim that a person is innocent until proved guilty.

Yet this is precisely what is being proposed in rape cases.

The government intends to change the definition of consent to sex, the common defence against the charge of rape, so the defendant will have to prove that the woman did in fact consent.

Lawyers are divided over whether this would technically mean reversing the burden of proof. All agree, however, that it would make it much more difficult for a man accused of rape to defend himself. And that's because the government assumes that all men accused of rape are guilty.

In fact, the evidence suggests this is completely untrue. Home Office figures for 1996 showed that 25 per cent of rapes reported to the police were false or malicious or the complainant withdrew the charge. In a further 39 per cent of reported cases the police or the Crown Prosecution Service took no further action because the complainant and suspect knew each other and so the circumstances were ambiguous; and a further 7 per cent of cases resulted in an acquittal.

Yet the government not only fails to acknowledge this, but also uses statistical jiggery-pokery to produce a false picture of soaring rapes and thousands of rapists escaping conviction.

True, there was a fall in the conviction rate from 24 per cent in 1985 to 9 per cent m 1997. Yet that may be because freer sexual behaviour makes rape claims more untenable. While 'stranger rapes' are very rare, 'date rapes' between acquaintances have soared from 1,300 in 1985 to 5,000 in 1996, almost half of all reported cases.

Rape is without doubt a most heinous crime. Yet most reasonable people would probably think that being jumped on in a dark alley is a completely different matter from having second thoughts, sometimes in retrospect, about a bloke with whom you've gone home after a party or with whom you've already been sleeping.

Anti-man prejudice, in fact, runs through government thinking. Baroness Jay and her Women's Unit constantly fork out the old chestnut that one woman in four is assaulted by her partner. In fact, most British domestic violence studies on which the government relies for such claims are effectively rigged; they ask only women, not men, for their domestic violence experiences, mainly from self-selecting samples of abused women.

Yet reputable international research shows overwhelmingly that acts of domestic violence are initiated by women upon men at least as frequently as vice versa.

Asked why the Women's Unit had made no reference to all this research, Jay replied that the government couldn't get involved in such 'subtle' issues.

Instead, it resorts to unsubtle threats to pursue feckless 'deadbeat dads' for child support, promoting the impression that fathers routinely desert their children.

In fact, many fathers desperately want to continue to parent their children after divorce but find that the courts put huge obstacles in their way, even if the men have acted blamelessly while their wives have not.

Family court judges tend to force fathers to prove they are fit parents, prove they are not violent or feckless. By contrast, they assume that mothers are generally the best parent for the child to live with, regardless of how they have behaved.

Of course, some men do behave very badly towards their wives and children. Divorce barristers, however, estimate that no more than about a third of the husbands they see are violent, and that both women and men cheat on each other in equal proportions.

Yet the courts are institutionally biased against husbands, ousting them from their homes on the slightest pretext, stripping a man of his children and his assets even if his wife has gone off with a lover and his own behaviour has been exemplary.

The judges will also accept a wife's claims that the man is violent on the basis of no evidence, in a system where it is impossible to mount a proper cross examination of her allegations. Yet on this pretext they will deprive a man of contact with his children.

Lack of contact with their children is a source of immense injustice and misery for many fathers. Lawyers say a typical scenario is this.

Mother decides to divorce because she's got a new man. The easiest way to get rid of Father is to claim he's been violent to her or the children. The father leaves or is ousted. His access to the children is governed by a contact order made by the court on the advice of a court welfare officer. Yet the mother has the whip hand in controlling the father's contact. He finds regularly that the children are too busy to see him. When he turns up to see his children, it's often the boyfriend who tells him to push off. Yet somehow the mother seems able to persuade the court that she is entitled to move the contact goal posts without redress.

The new president of the High Court's family division, Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss, denied earlier this year that fathers got an unfair deal on contact although, she added ambiguously, a small minority of non-custodial fathers 'gave rise to real problems'.

How could she possibly be so complacent when fathers are routinely denied contact on grounds produced by welfare officers that are so spurious as to be incomprehensible?

There was the father who, in McDonald's, spread his arms to his daughter and said, 'Bet you haven't seen me in a suit before', a watching welfare officer misinterpreted the gesture, decided the child had refused to return the father's proffered embrace, and he was denied all contact with the child as a result.

Then there was the father whose overnight contact with his five-year-old was stopped because 'the child had many milestones ahead of him'; another who was denied contact because he 'had to prove his commitment'; another because 'this is the mother's first child'; another because he was 'over-enthusiastic'; yet another because 'the child fell asleep in his car on the way home'.

One child of 13 hadn't seen his father for eight years because he was led to believe that an injunction against his father prevented it. No one—certainly not his mother— had told him that the injunction would last a maximum of three months and that for most of that eight years he had every right to see his father. And so on and so, appallingly, on.

The disastrous impact of fatherlessness upon children is well-documented. The impact on fathers is less well-known. Some are driven to nervous breakdowns or suicide; others lose their jobs as they try to visit their children who have moved to a different part of the country.

Of course, there are men who walk out on their wives and bust their families. But the majority of men are divorced against their will. The pain of family breakdown becomes unbearable when compounded by the gross injustice of a legal system that under cover of impartiality so often rewards the offending spouse and punishes her victim.

How can this happen?

Welfare officers' conclusions about divorcing spouses are rarely questioned by judges who regard these officers as the only source of expert advice in such cases. Until now, they have been probation officers; henceforth, they will also be drawn from the children's branch of the Official Solicitor's Department and from guardians ad Stem. Yet this reform is unlikely to do much to counter their prevailing ethos, encapsulated by a document produced by the National Association of Probation Officers in 1996.

Entitled 'Equal Rights: Anti-Sexism Policy', this proclaimed that marriage subjected women to male tyranny; that society was based on patriarchal male control over women and children which extended into all institutions that the oppression of women must be challenged in the courts; and that therefore the aim of the welfare officer was to 'challenge the discrimination against women in contested residence and contact decisions'. Such sentiments may seem extreme; but the presumption of male violence which underpins them is now common throughout the family law system.

The Lord Chancellor's Advisory Board on Family Law said last year that the courts should stop fathers seeing their children simply on the basis of allegations of violence by their ex-wives. The board's extraordinary presumption of male guilt was backed by its claim that domestic violence research indicated 'in the great majority of cases the abuser is male and the victim female', and that fathers were overwhelmingly the perpetrators of domestic violence.

Yet the research certainly does not show this.

Most violence against children, moreover, is perpetrated by mothers or boyfriends.

A child's natural father is least likely to be violent towards it. The courts should actually be giving fathers, not mothers, the benefit of the doubt.

Many judges think mothers are intrinsically vulnerable and must be protected as they are generally to be the parent with care of the children. Yet why should this be? If a mother has gone off with her lover, jeopardising the well-being of her children and demonstrating infidelity to their father, promise-breaking deceit and selfishness, why should she be automatically regarded as the fitter parent to bring up the children?

The answer is to restore issues of conduct to divorce and the subsequent care of the children. The spurious argument that 'children's
needs' must come before any other consideration means children are being used as hostages to protect adults from facing the consequences of their own behaviour.

Children's needs are best met by having both their parents to look after them; failing that, by living with the more responsible parent.

This may even bring the divorce rate down, as has happened in America in states where mothers no longer get automatic custody.

Men are terrified of being thought prejudiced against women not least because of an old-fashioned sense of chivalry. They look at the absence of women among captains of industry or Members of Parliament; they look at the football hooligan and the burglar from hell and they think it must be true that men are basically vile victimisers and that women are their victims.

But life's a lot more complicated; and the result of such brow-beating into false stereotypes is that everyone ultimately becomes a loser."

By Anonymous on Tuesday, August 08, 2000 - 03:48 pm:

My family and myself have been deliberately involved with malafide intentions by my wife under sections 498A, 406 and 506 for the last 3 months. This is despite the fact that we have provided irrefutable evidence to the police at CAW Cell. The marriage happened 1 1/2 years back and the girl left her marital house in less than 2 months after marriage. For more than a year we requested her to sort the matter out. Being vindictive, she used to threaten me to either separate myself from my family or face dire consequences. The girl infact has been threatening us for the last so many months to get us all behind bars since her brother is a lawyer and unlce as District Judge (No one listens to this at all).

We have been living under tremendous tensions and having sleepless nights for the last few months wondering when the police will come and arrest us. This law has been so atrociously missued aganst us.

Has the law become so blind that it does not even let man any say or give any hearing?

I am feeling ashamed to be born in India.

My family reputation is at stake.

Will the Home Minister wake up and understand the plight of us men.

If educated people from families of repute face such situations, what happens to the mere mortals.

Worse, I never got married to face this day.

I do not know when will we be falsely charge-sheeted. But I do know that I am going to file a P.I.L. in higher courts to fight against this malaise.

At least the evidence being provided from the boy's family be given weightage, shouldn't it be ????

By Vikas on Monday, January 08, 2001 - 04:03 pm:

My family and myself have been framed under a false dowry case . We got married one year back . For the past two months my parenst and myself are living under great tension on seeing ourselves behind the bars.
All that the girl wanted was that i should leave my parents forever. I'm the only son of my parents and it was not humanly possible for me to leave them.
Infact my parenst dont stay with me. They stay in Lucknow ( UP )and i work in chandigarh.
But my wife never allowed me even receive or make call to my parents.
She used to toruture me by using etremnely abusive language for my parents . Used to address my mother a prostitute and used to say that i've learned all bed things from her only.
When all this bacame unbearable for me , i left the house one day and my job.

Now they are ready for seperation but are demanding 10lacs in cash which I dont have.
On refusing theyve filed a dowryu case on my and my parents .

I dont know what to do. But I'm outraged to see such stupid laws.
I dont think its benefiting anyone.

IS there anyone to help me out.
Can we all men get united and raise our voices on tbis.
We have to do this. Else the instiution called Marriage will soon beome a fake

By Anonymous on Tuesday, April 03, 2001 - 07:46 pm:

I had posted a message on this topic a few days ago, but u have not seen fit to put my message on this board.
I was given to understand that this board was for those who are the victims, whether male or female, but now I see that only the male victims are given a chance to have an opinion.
When a girl gets married, and I speak for the 90% of the female population, she wants to be with a man because she loves him. In love matches the couple know each other and are aware of each other's faults, but in arranged matches the couple has to get to know one another and the love grows. However in Indian families the girl is treated as if she is a commodity to use and throw away if the needs are not satisfied. It should be understood that the upbringing and home atmosphere is different in each house, and the girl should be given some time to adjust to her new surroundings. But on the contrary the girl is expected to behave as if she has been in her sasural all her life, and the taunts about her upbriging, character, dowry etc start sometimes on the next day after marriage.
I too got married thinking that my husband was in favor of the alliance, but imagine my shock on the (suhag raat) wedding night itself, which I did not have because my m-i-l never had one, my husband told me that I had to "prove" myself before he gives me my marital rights. The next morning my jethani told me that I should give in to the demands or else face the consequences. I was either too naive or chose to ignore this, therefore I am now facng the consequences. I have been served divorce papers by my husband at the behest of my m-i-l and my jeth, who is the head of the family.
Tell me what should I do? Sign the papers or file a case on grounds of dowry harrasment against my husband andd his family?
I know that girls do take advantage of and misuse the law but what about those girls who are genuinely abused because of this curse that our society lives under?
I would like to see this posted on this board.


editor's note

We did not discard any of the messages in last days. Please check the topic or URL appropriately.
Best rgds
Ed.

By Anonymous on Tuesday, May 08, 2001 - 09:22 pm:

I am a resident of the US and have come to this country when I was 18 yrs old. And with hard work i have completed my Phd on my own. I wanted to set an example to our generation of people and also to my freinds . I married a fatherless girl about a year ago and bore most of the marriage expense myself. Right after marriage , i mean the first night itself , she wanted me to sign off all my property and that i might inherit into her name and to take care of her family. I adore my parents cause what ever i have become today is because of all the values they have inspired into me. I refused to do what she wanted and told her to mend her ways before i even took her to the us. Well she harrased my parents, who look after even people who are not related to us like their own. After a lot of thought I did not want to be in this relation . I knew it would get worse and i filed for divorce . Two months after that , my family was charged under some idiotic dowry case that does not even check the validity of the case . At present I have like six cases aganst me filed by the girls family. I was intending to end this phony marriage early so atleast the girl would get a second chance in life ans maybe she will learn about love. After going through all that I am right now , I have decided to drag this case as far as i can. I will not sit and take this idiotic law on its face value. I will fight it out. I was always proud to be an Indian , now i doubt it. I understand that dowry is a social problem in India , and me among many others want to change it .And is this how we are treated. I have lost faith in people. I dont like what i have become , but i am not going to take all this crap lying down like a •••••. I will fight it . It is costing me my life ... All the hardwork and values have become useless , just because some one goes and lies in a court of law and without any type of inquiry , we the men are put through hell . And even after we win we are not able to sue this "insults " to humanity. I hope and pray that India opens her eyes and see's fairness. I am with punishing those who seek dowry , but what about those who are misusing the law .
India has lost lot of brains because of the so called reservations .. and now it is killing all those who want to make changes to certain social evils as dowry.

I pray that India opens her eyes soon , or it shall be an eye sore.

By Anonymous on Wednesday, August 29, 2001 - 11:33 pm:

I am writing this to see if I can find a solution to
my friend's problem whose wife filed a false dowry
complaint. My friend and his wife were married & lived
together for almost a year....things didn't go well
(without going into too much details) and they decided
to seperate... but, his wife's family demanded
$100,000 (almost 47lakhs in Rs.) to agree for a mutual
consent divorce .... when he disagreed for that money & filed for divorce in india & served her with notice,
she filed for dowry-harassment case .... mentioning
that he & his family beat her up on a certain day (on
that day fortunately he was in USA ...) .... am sure
if this case comes to inquiry in india, this could be
proven false with the plenty of evidence he has .....

BUT, the problem is this guy (my friend) is in USA and
the case won't come to hearing till he's there ....
and using this, his wife's family is bribing police to
harass my friend's parents on a regular basis in the
name of inquiry ..... are there any ways to get the
court to take up this case without my friend being
there (since his parents who are named in this
false-complaint are in india).... any suggestions
would be greatly appreciated .....