They only "rebuked" the village council?? What about making them sit on their knees for 5 hours, bowing up and down, till they faint. Now that will be justice. The friggin' meddlers!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Madhanee: *
State should not be in business of making people do PT.
[/QUOTE]
State should be in the business of making sure such things don't happen again by making an example (fullest extent of the law) of these meddlers. A "rebuke" is hardly even a slap on the wrist.
The State doesn't seem to have offered much of a redress to me. giving them a rebuke is all it amounts to, the money was hers in the first place.
Nah! I still think they got off too lightly. In Pakistan, there is a provision in the law, which is called suo-moto notice (not to be confused with Sumo), where a judge can take action on his own, without a plaintiff filing for redress.
I remember a number of years ago, Asma Jilani was asked to do a report by Nawaz Sharif on the status of women prisoners in Pakistan held under the hudood ordinance (you know, where if a woman is raped, then she is imprisoned for commiting adultery). Anyway, Asma Jilani worked very hard to document full statistics and a comprehensive report and presented it to NS. He, apparently, only needed it to satisfy some parliamentary query and thus put it in a dust-bin. A week later, Asma met a justice of the supreme court in a dinner party, and by the by mentioned that she recently completed this one report about the women. Next day, the judge called Asma on phone and asked to be taken to visit the Multan jail (where the bulk of these women were incarcerated). She gladly took him there and he saw the conditions and interviewed the women. Next day, he took a suo-moto notice of this case, and a week later all those women were set free, and the police were ordered to register criminal cases against the men who had put these women behind bars.
I agree with Faisal. The State has 'rebuked' the villagers which is tantamount to agreeing that there was something wrong. There should be some sort of mechanism whereby if there is a suspicion of a crime that police should carry out a full investigation complaint or not.
Indina judicial system is a farce (or a fart).
It is actually more advanced than 90% of the systems on the planet.
^ Which is not really something you will like to cheer about.
^ and 100% better than what god mystically provided. because the meachnisms to evolve are there. Now don't stone me for saying that! :)
Both India and Pakistan, and a bunch of countries in the former "British Empire", for the most part, still follow British common law, they got in jahaiz.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
**Nah! I still think they got off too lightly. In Pakistan, there is a provision in the law, which is called suo-moto notice (not to be confused with Sumo), where a judge can take action on his own, without a plaintiff filing for redress.
...] Next day, he took a suo-moto notice of this case, and a week later all those women were set free, and the police were ordered to register criminal cases against the men who had put these women behind bars.
[/QUOTE]
**
Faisal Bhai, So meaning that, in this case, if Suganthi had not filed a petition with the High Court, a judge could still have taken measures on his own accord - without needing a redress file to refer to? Does India also have this suo-moto notice?
Well according to Matsui, India’s courts are so much more advanced that all they need to do is give the guilty parties a damn good ticking off :nono:
I am not sure if the suo-moto provisions are added in the Pakistani judicial system later on, or were part of the original British law which we adopted in 1947. If it were part of the original law, then likely India will also have it, be default, unless they took it out deliberately.
However, for it to work, a judge needs to take some personal interest, investigate and decide. Some call it judicial activism, which if not handled properly can cause some other problems.
^ hm acha. Was just wondering about that. Thanks, Faisal Bhai.