Section 377 encourages Eunchs Gay,Msm Criminal Activies in INDIA

Section 377 encourages Eunchs Gay,Msm Criminal Activies in INDIA >>

KOLKATA: Delhi High Court's order acknowledging the rights of homosexuals has put the Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government in a piquant situation.
Caught between the court and protests against the verdict, the government is treading with caution. While it welcomes the proposed changes in the rape laws, it is silent on the scrapping of Section 377, which the high court has ruled against.

The government's dilemma became apparent during the meeting state advocate-general Balai Roy had with West Bengal Commission for Women (WBCW) chairperson Malini Bhattacharya at law minister Rabilal Maitra's chamber. The government endorsed the commission's argument to add more teeth to the existing rape laws but did not commit anything on the deletion of Section 377 that WBCW had been pressing for. If things go according to plan, a rapist can be sentenced to life.

The change in rape laws has already found its way into the draft Criminal Law Amendment (CLA) Bill, which the Centre is likely to table in Parliament.

The women's panel wants to have a separate category for molestation and sexual harassment under the new rape laws. The reason, as the chairperson put it, is that sometimes men accused of attempted rape are often tried on a par with molestation charges, leading to a dilution of the offence.

Bhattacharya felt that the government can do away with Section 354 of IPC, which deals with the use of criminal force with an intent to outrage modesty, in case Section 509 of IPC is made more stringent. However, in view of the court recognition to homosexuality,
WBCW wants the government to expand the ambit of the law and make it gender-neutral as the

sections are specific to women. Bhattacharya wants molestation punishable with five years of rigorous imprisonment.

Under the proposed law, a man can file a complaint with police if verbally abused or teased by others by making obscene gestures. The state government wants to include incest as a major offence punishable with a jail term of two years or more.

There are plans on the government's part to make the rape laws gender-neutral so that even a man can lodge a complaint in case of forcible sex or sodomy. WBCW wants insertion of a new section for unlawful sexual contact when a man with a sexual purpose touches a woman without her consent. This can call for a three-year term.

The government, however, does not want to interfere much in marital rape in case the age of the wife is less than 18. WBCW, though, said that in case of difference of more than five years and where the wife is a minor, it can constitute rape. Rape or sexual assault of a minor or physically challenged person will also attract increased punishment.

The state is in favour of a woman police officer to register the complaint of a victim of sexual assault or rape. If such an officer is not available, then a woman government employee has to record the complaint. The state also proposes to get the victim examined by a woman doctor.

Legalising Gay Sex or 377 will destroy social fabric in INDIA

 

377 Ka Ganda me danda 

Download  Now &

Mobile ; 3gPP  ; Mp3 ; Dvd ; Vcd ; BlueRay Disc 

 

Legalising

  Gay Sex or 377  

will destroy 

social fabric in INDIA

Centre declines to take stand on gay sex

New Delhi, Sep 17, DH News Service:

Refraining from taking any stand on the politically sensitive issue of gay sex, the government on Thursday left it to the Supreme Court to decide on the correctness of the Delhi High Court’s verdict that legalised homosexuality.

The Union Cabinet decided to ask the Attorney General G E Vahanavati to assist the Supreme Court on Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code relating to gay sex. The Government said that it was up to the apex court to decide on the law. “The Cabinet considered the report of the Group of Ministers and decided to ask the attorney general to assist the Supreme Court in every way desired in arriving at an opinion on the (Delhi) High Court judgment,” Information and Broadcasting Minister Ambika Soni said. She was addressing a news-conference after a meeting of the Union Cabinet, which was chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The Supreme Court had sought the government’s opinion after a Christian organisation and a disciple of Yoga Guru Ramdev approached the apex court challenging the Delhi High Court’s July 2 order that legitimized homosexuality between consenting adults. The Government had constituted a Group of Ministers (GoM) to shape its opinion on the sensitive issue. The GoM comprised Home Minister P Chidambaram, Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad and Law Minister M Veerappa Moily. GoM suggestion The GoM is believed to have suggested that the Government should not oppose the Delhi High Court’s order, but should also refrain from taking a stand, but leave it to the Supreme Court itself to decide. Sources said that the Government had refrained from taking a stand on gay sex considering the political sensitivity of the issue. The Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR) too has of late moved the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court’s order. The statutory body for protection of child rights has petitioned that the dilution of Section 377 of IPC has legalised one more way of sexual exploitation of children. The Section 377 of the IPC defines homosexuality as unnatural sex, which is punishable with imprisonment up to life. But the Delhi High Court on July 2 struck it down stating that it violates Article 21 (Right to Protection of Life and Personal Liberty), 14 (Right to Equality before Law) and 15 (Prohibition of Discrimination on Grounds of Religion, Race, Caste, Sex or Place of Birth) of the Constitution.

Supreme Court to decide on Legalising homosexuality: Govt ?????

New Delhi: The Union government on Thursday said that it won't oppose the Delhi High Court order decriminalising homosexuality. It also said that it was up to the Supreme Court to take a final decision on the issue.

The government’s stand is on expected lines considering the political implications of the issue given the strong reservations exhibited by sections of the society.By deciding against taking a position on the issue, the government has, effectively, decided not to oppose the Delhi HC order that leaglaised gay sex and has put the ball in the SC’s court.

However, the government has decided to ask the Attorney General G E Vahanavati to assist the SC in every possible way with the case.“The Union Cabinet today studied the report and has decided that Attorney General to help all possible help of Supreme Court to take a decision on the correctness of High Court’s decision (on Section 377),” said Information and Broadcasting Minister Ambika Soni after the Cabinet meeting here today.

Addressing the media persons, Union minister Ambika Soni said attorney general G E Vahanavati would assist the apex court on Section 377 of IPC relating to gay sex.She, however, declined to say anything on more or elaborate on the government’s stand on the issue.

Earlier, official sources had claimed that the three ministries -- Home, Health and Law -- have agreed to the document circulated by the Law Ministry suggesting that the judgement in the Supreme Court should not be opposed.Before finalising the note for the Union Cabinet, Home Minister P Chidambaram, Health Minister Ghulam Nabi Azad and Law Minister M Veerappa Moily had held series of meetings to arrive at a conclusion on the issue.

Delhi High Court in July legalised gay sex among consenting adults, holding that the law – Article 377 - making it a criminal offence violates fundamental rights.Later on August 17, the Supreme Court had sought a response from the government on petitions filed by a Christian body and a disciple of Yoga guru Ramdev seeking a stay on the Delhi High Court verdict legalising gay sex on the ground it will have a catastrophic effect on the society's moral fabric.

Legalising Gay Sex or 377 will destroy social fabric in INDIA

> 377 Ka Ganda me danda > Download > Now <
Mobile > 3gPP > Mp3 > Dvd > Vcd > BlueRay Disc <

 

Legalising Gay Sex or 377 will destroy social fabric in INDIA

 

 

> 377 Ka Ganda me danda > Download > Now <
Mobile > 3gPP > Mp3 > Dvd > Vcd > BlueRay Disc < 

 

 

Legalising  Gay Sex or 377  will destroy social fabric in INDIA

 

> 377 Ka Ganda me danda > Download > Now <
Mobile > 3gPP > Mp3 > Dvd > Vcd > BlueRay Disc < 

 

Child rights panel moves SC against gay ruling

http://sideeffectsof377.blogspot.com/ 

http://sideeffectsof377.blogspot.com/

NEW DELHI: The Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR) has moved the Supreme Court challenging 

Delhi High Court order decriminalising gay sex among 

consenting adults.

The statutory commission for protection of child rights has petitioned that the dilution of section 377 of IPC has legalised one more way of large scale sexual exploitation of children.

A bench comprising Justice B N Agrawal, Justice G S Singhvi and Justice M K Sharma, after hearing the plea, issued notices to the Centre, NGO Naz Foundation and others on whose petition the high court had held that criminalisation of gay sex among the consenting adults was violative of fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.

The bench also tagged the petition of DCPCR with other similar appeals on which the notices have already been issued and posted the matter for hearing on October 1.

Senior advocate Amarender Sharan, appearing for DCPCR, said dilution of the penal provision will have pernicious effects on children.

The bench, however, wanted to know whether DCPCR had intervened in the matter before the high court. At this, Mr Sharan replied in negative and said it was doing so now as DCPCR, after going through the judgement, has filed the appeal as it is a statutory commission for the protection of children.

The petitioner commission submitted that plethora of scientific research highlighting the problems of homosexual behaviour and their serious impact on child welfare was not brought before the high court which held that the homosexual behaviour is normal.

“The high court did not have the benefit of scientific studies and on a very scanty, selective material has passed the judgement holding that the homosexual behaviour is a normal behaviour”, the petition said.

The commission contended that gay sex would adversely affect the physiological and mental development of a child and the high court has failed to take into account the problems encountered by homosexuals and their outcome on society at large including children.

The commission further said that the age of 18 years to define adulthood for consensual homosexual act in private is unreasonable as the age is characterised by changes and turmoil where the inquisitiveness and peer group pressure play a major role in the personality development of a child.

The apex court had earlier issued a notice to the Centre on a petition filed by a Christian body, a disciple of yoga guru Ramdev and astrologer Suresh Kumar Kaushal seeking a stay on the high court order legalising gay sex on the ground that it will have a catastrophic effect on the society’s moral fabric.

All the petitioners have sought setting aside of the high court verdict legalising gay sex between consenting adults in private, which was earlier a criminal offence punishable with upto life imprisonment.

Delhi child rights panel moves apex court on gay sex

Delhi's child-rights panel on Tuesday moved the Supreme Court opposing a high court ruling decriminalising homosexuality, saying it would permit sex between men as young as 18.
The Delhi Commission for Protection of Child Rights (DCPCR) in its lawsuit pointed out that the laws of the land prevent men below the age of 21 from marrying women and even countries like the United Kingdom permit homosexuality between adults above the age of 21.
Admitting the lawsuit, a bench of Justice BN Agrawal and Justice GS Singhvi issued notices to the union government and the civil society Naz Foundation, seeking their stand on the Delhi High Court verdict.
The high court had in early July decriminalised gay sex between two consenting adults, acting on a lawsuit by the NGO Naz Foundation. The union government has so far not challenged the verdict.
Appearing for DCPCR, former additional solicitor general Amrendra Saran sought immediate suspension of the high court ruling, but the court slated the matter for hearing on Oct 1.
In its lawsuit, the DCPCR said it was "constrained to move the apex court challenging the high court ruling as the high court has failed to take into account various aspects related to homosexuality, which actually adversely affect the physiological state of a child".
The DCPCR lawsuit pointed out that for the purpose of consensual gay sex, the Delhi High court ruling has considered a person of age 18 years or above as adult.
"But it is pertinent to point out at this stage that the Sexual Offence Act, 1967 of the United Kingdom partially decriminalizes homosexual acts in private between two males, both of whom must have attained the age 21 years," said the lawsuit.
"So even in the society like England, the minimum age for homosexuality in private is 21 years," said the lawsuit, adding the Delhi High Court's act of allowing homosexuality at the age of 18 years is "unjustified and without reason".
"In other words, the maturity and inability to comprehend the consequences of an act is not well developed in an individual of 18 years," said the lawsuit.
"Ironically, the high court ruling allows 18 year old men to indulge in homosexuality, while even the law of the land bars men's marriage below the age of 21 and girl's marriage below the age of 18.
"Even psychologically and physically, the age of 18 years is the age of changes and turmoil where the inquisitiveness and peer group pressure play a major role in the personality development of the child," said the DCPCR lawsuit.
The lawsuit said the high court appeared to be influenced by the fact that homosexuality has been legalized in some Western countries like the Netherlands, Canada, Belgium, South Africa, Norway and South Africa, which, however, are culturally very different from India.
The lawsuit contended that India and China, which are home to over two-fifths of the world's population, have entirely different cultures.

World Premire.....377 Ka Ganda me danda

Over 20 boys say Abdul Rashid Sheikh repeatedly raped them for four years. The man still roams free. Meet Mumbai's newest...

Married dad of four, Abdul Rashid Sheikh allegedly sexually abused over 20 young boys repeatedly and then secured their secrecy by threatening them with physical harm.

Sheikh allegedly knew all the victims and, in fact, in some of the cases, Sheikh and the boys' parents were family friends.

Traumatic: Atif Sheikh, 16, said he was raped seven times over a period of four months and was forced to watch porn films

Last week, six children, abused when they were between 15 and 18 years old, finally summoned the courage to tell their parents, who, in turn, filed a complaint with the Vakola police.

Afroz Rehman (name changed) who was allegedly abused when he was 16, said, "Uncle ruined my life.

I was too shocked to come to terms with what had happened to me, but I knew it was terribly wrong.

But I did not have the courage to tell anyone. I hope he stays in jail forever."

Porn CD

Afroz said he was first shown a porn CD and then raped, repeatedly.

Yet, Sheikh has not been arrested. Senior police inspector at the Vakola police station, Anil Kharade said, "We have registered the complaint, but have not yet arrested him because we are awaiting concrete evidence.

Only a few boys have come forward and recorded their statement, and that is not enough."

Despite requests by the desperate parents the Vakola police only registered an FIR under section 373 of the IPC (buying minors for purposes of prostitution) and section 377 (unnatural sex).

However, IPS officer-turned-lawyer Y P Singh said the man should have been arrested.

"If the children have come forward and a complaint has been filed, the police should have arrested him immediately. They have enough grounds to arrest him."

When told that the police wanted more evidence, he said, "The statements of the boys are evidence.

Forensic tests need to be conducted at his home where the incidents took place and physical evidence like the porn CDs need to be confiscated immediately."

Teacher held for sexual abuse of students

PUNE: The Alandi police on Friday arrested a 24-year-old teacher at an ashram near Alandi for alleged sexual abuse of his students for the last
two months.

The police have identified the suspect as Vighneshwar Patil of Jalgaon. The incident came into light when a 14-year-old student disclosed the incident to his parents, said inspector Ratansinh Rajput.

"We have booked Patil under section 377 (unnatural offences) of the Indian Penal Code. The suspect had sexually abused five other students also from the ashram," Rajput said.

Rajput said that, according the complaint, the suspect used to call the students to his room and, on the pretext of massaging his hands and legs, used to sodomise them.

"There are 16 boys studying at the ashram. The suspect had abused five of them in the last two months. We are investigating whether other students have also been abused," Rajput said.

Delhi man who raped teen in Germany 12 yrs ago held

NEW DELHI: Law-keepers finally arrested a man who allegedly fled from Germany after raping a teenager there 12 years ago. Jaswant Singh (36) was
arrested by the crime branch of Delhi Police after German authorities approached them last year through the ministry of external affairs. Singh reportedly runs a transport company in north Delhi.

Singh was arrested from his residence in northwest Delhi's Adarsh Nagar on Sunday night. He had allegedly raped a 17-year-old girl in a park in Germany's Darmstadt on the night of August 1, 1997, along with two friends. The accused will be tried in New Delhi as Berlin has not sought his extradition.

The arrest follows "painstaking'' investigations for over eight months after Germany approached New Delhi last year. Singh, who hails from Miani in Hoshiarpur, Punjab, allegedly dragged the girl, who was walking home after missing a train, into a park and raped her. "He slapped her when she resisted and then raped her. His two friends Karan Singh and Mohd Shahzad, a Pakistani national also raped her,'' said DCP (crime and railways) Neeraj Thakur.

Singh, who was illegally staying in Germany, left for Holland soon after his two friends were arrested and then reached Delhi. The involvement of Singh and two others came to light when the owner of `Le Petit' restaurant, where he was working as a chef, overheard two workers talking about the incident and informed police about it.

Following the tip-off, two of the accused were arrested by the German police on August 5, 1997 while Singh managed to escape. A German court sentenced Shahzad to eight years imprisonment, while Karan was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. The victim had identified the two in court while she identified Singh through his photographs.

Singh had gone to Germany in 1992 and had sought political asylum, which was later rejected. However, he continued to stay there illegally. "Since he had been living in Germany since 1992 as an illegal immigrant on fake identities, German authorities were unable to get much information about him except his name,'' Thakur added.

The German embassy forwarded copies of the case record to MEA in 2008 with a request to initiate criminal proceedings against Singh. "We had a name and a place of birth. Information regarding persons with similar names and description who had arrived from Germany over the past few years were gathered. Sources were deployed and persons engaged in facilitating immigration were also tapped,'' said a senior police officer.

"Singh never expected to be caught after 12 years for a crime he committed in another country,'' added the officer. Singh got married in 2000 and has two children. He had been booked under Section 376 (2) (G) (gangrape), Section 377 (unnatural offences) and Section 341 (wrongful restraint) of Indian Penal Code. IPC Section 4 (trial of a person committing crime in any part of the world) has also been invoked against him.

Government undecided on plea against legalising gay sex

New Delhi, Sep 10 (IANS) The government is yet to formulate its view on how to react to a Delhi High Court judgment legalising consensual homosexuality, Information and Broadcasting Minister Ambika Soni said here Thursday.

The issue was to have been discussed at Thursday’s cabinet meeting chaired by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh but was not taken up in the absence of Home Minister P. Chidambaram, who is currently in the US, Soni added.

“The home minister was not present and so the matter was not discussed,” she told reporters after the cabinet meeting.

The high court decision has been challenged in the Supreme Court, which has asked the government for its point of view.

Asked how the government would now respond to the Supreme Court query, Soni said: “The law ministry will take up the matter now.”

The Supreme Court had July 9 sought the respective stands of the union and the Delhi governments on a lawsuit challenging the Delhi High Court verdict that also partly scrapped the penal provisions against homosexuality framed during the British Raj.

A bench of Chief Justice K.G. Balakrishnan issued notices to the two governments, besides seven others, including NGO Naz foundation which had originally moved Delhi High Court to scrap the penal provision against homosexuality, seeking their respective stands.

The bench, which also included Justice P. Sathasivam, issued notices on a lawsuit filed by Delhi-based astrologer-cum-advocate Suresh Kaushal and sought the respondents’ replies by July 20.

At the hearing July 20, the Supreme Court refused to suspend the high court verdict after Attorney General Goolam E. Vahanvati indicated the government’s lack of keenness in seeking a stay on the ruling.

“There are three ministries involved in the matter. We need some more time to formulate our view,” said Vahanvati, also indicating that the government was not keen on having the verdict suspended.

“We don’t exactly want a stay,” Vahanvati maintained.

Kaushal contended before the bench that the high court had delivered a ‘perverse ruling’ that would threaten the natural balance of society.

Kaushal’s lawsuit urges the apex court to overturn the high court’s July 2 ruling legalising carnal interaction in private between any two consenting adults of the same sex.

Defined as unnatural sex under section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, homosexuality was punishable with imprisonment up to life.

Appearing for Kaushal, his counsel Praveen Agrawal contended before the bench that the high court should not have delivered this verdict legalizing homosexual acts as even otherwise the cases registered under section 377 of the Indian Penal Code happen to be few and far between.

Agreeing to this contention, the bench observed: “True. We too have not seen many cases in our career spanning over three decades.”

Alluding to the possibilities of social anomalies like men marrying men and women marrying women as a result of the high court ruling, Agrawal urged the bench to suspend the ruling till a decision on his petition. The bench, however, declined the plea.