Exactly. All our hitherto HRM acumen going to be topsy turvy.
Visit the following related site:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/N...Times/Bitter-\
sweet_home_truths/articleshow/573891.cms
regards
From India, Delhi
174Visit the following related site:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/N...Times/Bitter-\
sweet_home_truths/articleshow/573891.cms
regards
From India, Delhi
The point here is:
They had been living separately for ~1.5 years. The boy says he was beaten by the girl several times. The girl claims, "Dating allowance" is the reason for the marriage to go sour.
The personal life issues ( we do not know, who is right or wrong, and as professionals we should not be concerned about it) are dangerously interfering professional lives of others. The LAW is being misued to settle personal score.
They had been living separately for ~1.5 years. The boy says he was beaten by the girl several times. The girl claims, "Dating allowance" is the reason for the marriage to go sour.
The personal life issues ( we do not know, who is right or wrong, and as professionals we should not be concerned about it) are dangerously interfering professional lives of others. The LAW is being misued to settle personal score.
Brother!
You have slightly reverted back. It is not the quesstion of individual issue. It is a question of general issue. The invisible fire is going to burn all work places into ashes. There is no time to wait and watch. It is time to act and that too in FIRE FIGHTERS' speed.
regards
From India, Delhi
You have slightly reverted back. It is not the quesstion of individual issue. It is a question of general issue. The invisible fire is going to burn all work places into ashes. There is no time to wait and watch. It is time to act and that too in FIRE FIGHTERS' speed.
regards
From India, Delhi
Following this thread :
Some of you must have read in the press that Wipro chief Aziz Premji got sued in the latest spate of 498A cases
http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2006/nov/23wipro.htm
http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/article...337558&sid=REG
A female filed a 498A on her husband [who was employed by WIPRO] and named Wipro Chief in her complaint alleging WIPRO broke her family !!!
Premji has denied that any dating allowance is ever paid by Wipro
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6180224.stm
<link outdated-removed>
Now the story seems to be a bIT different when narrated by the husband !!
Was Wipro staffer beaten by wife?
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...how/576884.cms
I was beaten by my wife: Wipro man
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/C...how/575641.cms
or
http://beatenstaffer.notlong.com/
So..... This turns out to be NOTHING BUT PURE BLACKMAIL FROM THE WIFE
An ICON figure, a start performer in the Indian software Industry and Indian who made India Proud around the globe, has been sullied by an irate wife !!
Is this where India is heading to ?
Is this the geneder equality we are all waiting for ?
498A is ONE OF THE MOST MISUSED sections of Law
Why are we NOT SCRAPPING THIS LAW TOTALLY from the Law books ?
What will the developed world think of us ?
Is this Democracy or is it YOUNG WIVES GONE CRAZY ??
Regards
Vinayak
Some of you must have read in the press that Wipro chief Aziz Premji got sued in the latest spate of 498A cases
http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2006/nov/23wipro.htm
http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/article...337558&sid=REG
A female filed a 498A on her husband [who was employed by WIPRO] and named Wipro Chief in her complaint alleging WIPRO broke her family !!!
Premji has denied that any dating allowance is ever paid by Wipro
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6180224.stm
<link outdated-removed>
Now the story seems to be a bIT different when narrated by the husband !!
Was Wipro staffer beaten by wife?
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...how/576884.cms
I was beaten by my wife: Wipro man
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/C...how/575641.cms
or
http://beatenstaffer.notlong.com/
So..... This turns out to be NOTHING BUT PURE BLACKMAIL FROM THE WIFE
An ICON figure, a start performer in the Indian software Industry and Indian who made India Proud around the globe, has been sullied by an irate wife !!
Is this where India is heading to ?
Is this the geneder equality we are all waiting for ?
498A is ONE OF THE MOST MISUSED sections of Law
Why are we NOT SCRAPPING THIS LAW TOTALLY from the Law books ?
What will the developed world think of us ?
Is this Democracy or is it YOUNG WIVES GONE CRAZY ??
Regards
Vinayak
A democracy is based on checks and balances. That is considered the inherent strength of democracy. Checks and balances should be in place to ensure that power is NOT concentrated just in one section of the society.
However right from the oldest democracies, there have been instances when the society or law makers have overlooked or forgotten or missed these checks and balances
The so called Domestic Violence act [and the TADA and POTA and erstwhile "emergency" and "MISA" acts] were situations when the Indian democracy failed in maintaining checks and balances
The result is here to see
While ORDINARY victims of these attacks are themselves maligned and sullied in public, one can only imagine how badly a company like WIPRO - an Indian Jewel, has got hit by bad reporting in the Indian Press
I've seen almost 30+ reports connecting WIPRO with a NON existent dating allowance !!!
Now one more has emerged
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...how/551934.cms
showing a MAN [is he too from the IT sector ???] in a compromising posture !!!
what do these people - esp. the ones file false complaints wish to achieve
I suppose they are after notoriety and they feel boldened by the fact that FALSE 498A cases are hardly punished
I strongly suggest that the various High courts levy exemplary punishments on those who file false 498A complaints so that NO one will dare to misuse the law with oblique motives
However right from the oldest democracies, there have been instances when the society or law makers have overlooked or forgotten or missed these checks and balances
The so called Domestic Violence act [and the TADA and POTA and erstwhile "emergency" and "MISA" acts] were situations when the Indian democracy failed in maintaining checks and balances
The result is here to see
While ORDINARY victims of these attacks are themselves maligned and sullied in public, one can only imagine how badly a company like WIPRO - an Indian Jewel, has got hit by bad reporting in the Indian Press
I've seen almost 30+ reports connecting WIPRO with a NON existent dating allowance !!!
Now one more has emerged
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...how/551934.cms
showing a MAN [is he too from the IT sector ???] in a compromising posture !!!
what do these people - esp. the ones file false complaints wish to achieve
I suppose they are after notoriety and they feel boldened by the fact that FALSE 498A cases are hardly punished
I strongly suggest that the various High courts levy exemplary punishments on those who file false 498A complaints so that NO one will dare to misuse the law with oblique motives
Domestic Violence Act would soon prove that its ramifications are not confined to the four walls of our domestic lives. Though it has only started a creepy crawl into the Indian Corporates but nonetheless the effects aren't difficult to predict.
HR should look at the set of employees who are already undergoing hardships because of false dowry harassment cases against them, and it would realise that their 'high stress levels' are proving to be 'productivity inhibitors'for them. Though some employees might be able to give in their best without allowing their personal matters to interfere in professional contributions. But nonetheless, it cannot be denied that some negative effect on productivity is bound to be there.
Domestic Violence Act has only added fuel to an already smouldering fire. It is only a matter of time before we see this raging fire wanting to engulf the Corporates.
And the reason for this fire is completely against the rules of HR.
Benefits of education are said to be always positive. But there are some minds which tend to develop otherwise... they develop a capacity to function negatively. Such minds find ways to take advantage of other people's goodness... they are the 'wrongly empowered minds'. And such minds have surely drawn benefits by using a deadly weapon... 'misuse of Law'. It would be fit to call such people... 'misusers of law'.
Domestic Violence Act has given an additional leverage to the already existing leverage women enjoyed in India, especially the married ones. And if HR doesn't take congnizance of this issue now, it sure would face an alarmingly growing no. of stressful employees to tackle, with productivity taking a beating.
Regards,
Katyayani
HR should look at the set of employees who are already undergoing hardships because of false dowry harassment cases against them, and it would realise that their 'high stress levels' are proving to be 'productivity inhibitors'for them. Though some employees might be able to give in their best without allowing their personal matters to interfere in professional contributions. But nonetheless, it cannot be denied that some negative effect on productivity is bound to be there.
Domestic Violence Act has only added fuel to an already smouldering fire. It is only a matter of time before we see this raging fire wanting to engulf the Corporates.
And the reason for this fire is completely against the rules of HR.
Benefits of education are said to be always positive. But there are some minds which tend to develop otherwise... they develop a capacity to function negatively. Such minds find ways to take advantage of other people's goodness... they are the 'wrongly empowered minds'. And such minds have surely drawn benefits by using a deadly weapon... 'misuse of Law'. It would be fit to call such people... 'misusers of law'.
Domestic Violence Act has given an additional leverage to the already existing leverage women enjoyed in India, especially the married ones. And if HR doesn't take congnizance of this issue now, it sure would face an alarmingly growing no. of stressful employees to tackle, with productivity taking a beating.
Regards,
Katyayani
One thing, I did not understand,
How come Wipro, i.e. Premaji got summenos under DV act.
DV act is applicable for household only ( i.e. domestic violence ).
or is it misuse of this dv act ?
can anybody update me about DV act ?
How come Wipro, i.e. Premaji got summenos under DV act.
DV act is applicable for household only ( i.e. domestic violence ).
or is it misuse of this dv act ?
can anybody update me about DV act ?
Questions to Renuka Chowdhury
Q.1 We all are aware that 498A is rampantly misused. Instead of solving that problem, you have introduced DV bill. Why? Are you not worried about innocent families being legally terrorized?
Q.2 Men too are victims of domestic violence. Then why have you not provided legal protection to men under Domestic Violence Bill?
Q.3 You gave a statement on national television saying, “It is men’s turn to suffer”. Is that true? If you did, what do you mean by that?
Q.4 Do you agree that verbal or emotional abuse in Domestic Violence bill is a subjective and relative term? How will you make sure that using these clauses, women will not misuse this law?
Q.5 Domestic Violence Bill is applicable in live-in relationship, too. Do you have any statistics showing that women who are into live-in relationships are victims of domestic violence? It is unlikely that rural women will ever be in a live-in relationship.
Q.6 When we already have anti-dowry law 498A, then why have you incorporated the clause of dowry harassment in Domestic Violence Bill also?
Q.7 One clause says that if a woman does not have a legal title over the man’s property, if she has some interest, she can demand the property legally using domestic violence bill. Don’t you think this clause is violating men’s right?
Q.8 A clauses says that if a man ridicules, humiliates or abuses the woman sexually or violates the dignity of the woman, he is subjecting the woman of domestic violence. How would you define dignity? Dignity is not gender-specific. It is the quality of character, values and behaviour of a person irrespective of the gender. Are you saying that men have no dignity?
Q.9 Even if the assets, bank account/locker solely belongs to the husband, the woman has the rights to demand from the man legally according to domestic violence bill. Are you not trying to legalize extortion for women through this bill?
Q.10 Domestic violence bill also includes economic abuse. If a woman is asking something in monetary terms that the man can’t afford, do you think that the man should be imprisoned for this?
Q.11 You are requesting the Government to sensitize the police officer toward women in handling domestic violence cases. Do you want the police officer arrest the accused if they find the case to be fabricated?
Q.12 The clauses in Domestic Violence bill says that after the marriage or live-in relationship ends, the husband must provide alternative accommodation or pay the rent to the woman. According to the Hindu marriage, bigamy is a punishable offense. But live-in relationship that has no legal standing, a woman can have a number live-in relationship at the same time. What do you have to say about it? Are you not providing an opportunity to women to use domestic violence bill to extract property of the man legally?
Q.13 Domestic Violence Bill has established a price to emotional distress and mental torture and ordering the man to pay to the woman as compensation. Do you think those women who are not actually mentally tortured will never want to make quick money out of this clause? Why?
Q.14 You have already included live-in relationship in Domestic Violence Bill. What will be the responsibility of the woman to prove that she did had a live-in relationship with a man? What if the relationship never existed?
Q.15 The bill says that the woman has the right to ask the Protection officer to restrain the family members of the man to come and live together or even visit the house. Is this not violating the fundamental rights of the family members of the man? If not, how?
Q.16 The bill also says that the woman has the right to ask the protection officer to direct the man to leave the house. Is this not violating the rights of men? Even if the house legally belongs to the man, he is kicked out of his own house. Is this how you like to protect women?
Q.17 One clause says that after the complaint is registered, the man will have no right to communicate with the woman in any ways. If a person is arrested, the police will provide the person the right to contact anybody. And here you don’t want the man to contact the woman at all. What are you trying to do?
Q.18 The clause says that even after the live-in relationship has ended; the man can’t evict the woman from his own legally possessed house. Are you saying that even after live-in relationship ends, the man is liable to provide the woman? When the live-in relationship is not legally recognized, then how can you constrain men’s fundamental rights?
Q.19 The clause says that even if the live-in relationship existed in any point of time ever in the past, the woman has the rights to complain against the man for domestic violence. This way the woman is given a way to take revenge and extort money legally from the man whom she had a live-in relationship in the past. What do you have to say about this?
Q.20 The clause says that upon the sole testimony of the woman, the court can conclude that domestic violence was committed by the accused. That means the accused is guilty until proven innocent, and the woman need not prove her allegations. Do you think that this approach is as per the legal principles? Are you not taking away the constitutional rights of men? How? This way the bill will be misused just like 498A. What do you think about this?
Q.21 You know 498A is massively misused. You also know that Domestic Violence Bill will also be misused. What do you want to do? Is this how women can be protected by taking away all constitutional rights of men?
Q.22 You said that this bill is only to protect women from domestic violence. But the bill can easily break millions of families. Is this what you want?
Q.23 Many families, lawyers, NGOs all over the country are objecting on the way the bill is drafted. You don’t seem to be worried at all. Do you think their objection is baseless? Are you going to ignore them like you are doing in case of 498A?
Q.24 After all this, do you think you deserve to be the Minister of Women and Child Development? When you have introduced draconian laws like DV Bill and have not amended 498A, you don’t have any rights to ruin Indian family. What do you have to say?
Q.25 Are you not going to step down from the ministry for destroying Indian families and marriage? Why not?
From India, Mumbai
Q.1 We all are aware that 498A is rampantly misused. Instead of solving that problem, you have introduced DV bill. Why? Are you not worried about innocent families being legally terrorized?
Q.2 Men too are victims of domestic violence. Then why have you not provided legal protection to men under Domestic Violence Bill?
Q.3 You gave a statement on national television saying, “It is men’s turn to suffer”. Is that true? If you did, what do you mean by that?
Q.4 Do you agree that verbal or emotional abuse in Domestic Violence bill is a subjective and relative term? How will you make sure that using these clauses, women will not misuse this law?
Q.5 Domestic Violence Bill is applicable in live-in relationship, too. Do you have any statistics showing that women who are into live-in relationships are victims of domestic violence? It is unlikely that rural women will ever be in a live-in relationship.
Q.6 When we already have anti-dowry law 498A, then why have you incorporated the clause of dowry harassment in Domestic Violence Bill also?
Q.7 One clause says that if a woman does not have a legal title over the man’s property, if she has some interest, she can demand the property legally using domestic violence bill. Don’t you think this clause is violating men’s right?
Q.8 A clauses says that if a man ridicules, humiliates or abuses the woman sexually or violates the dignity of the woman, he is subjecting the woman of domestic violence. How would you define dignity? Dignity is not gender-specific. It is the quality of character, values and behaviour of a person irrespective of the gender. Are you saying that men have no dignity?
Q.9 Even if the assets, bank account/locker solely belongs to the husband, the woman has the rights to demand from the man legally according to domestic violence bill. Are you not trying to legalize extortion for women through this bill?
Q.10 Domestic violence bill also includes economic abuse. If a woman is asking something in monetary terms that the man can’t afford, do you think that the man should be imprisoned for this?
Q.11 You are requesting the Government to sensitize the police officer toward women in handling domestic violence cases. Do you want the police officer arrest the accused if they find the case to be fabricated?
Q.12 The clauses in Domestic Violence bill says that after the marriage or live-in relationship ends, the husband must provide alternative accommodation or pay the rent to the woman. According to the Hindu marriage, bigamy is a punishable offense. But live-in relationship that has no legal standing, a woman can have a number live-in relationship at the same time. What do you have to say about it? Are you not providing an opportunity to women to use domestic violence bill to extract property of the man legally?
Q.13 Domestic Violence Bill has established a price to emotional distress and mental torture and ordering the man to pay to the woman as compensation. Do you think those women who are not actually mentally tortured will never want to make quick money out of this clause? Why?
Q.14 You have already included live-in relationship in Domestic Violence Bill. What will be the responsibility of the woman to prove that she did had a live-in relationship with a man? What if the relationship never existed?
Q.15 The bill says that the woman has the right to ask the Protection officer to restrain the family members of the man to come and live together or even visit the house. Is this not violating the fundamental rights of the family members of the man? If not, how?
Q.16 The bill also says that the woman has the right to ask the protection officer to direct the man to leave the house. Is this not violating the rights of men? Even if the house legally belongs to the man, he is kicked out of his own house. Is this how you like to protect women?
Q.17 One clause says that after the complaint is registered, the man will have no right to communicate with the woman in any ways. If a person is arrested, the police will provide the person the right to contact anybody. And here you don’t want the man to contact the woman at all. What are you trying to do?
Q.18 The clause says that even after the live-in relationship has ended; the man can’t evict the woman from his own legally possessed house. Are you saying that even after live-in relationship ends, the man is liable to provide the woman? When the live-in relationship is not legally recognized, then how can you constrain men’s fundamental rights?
Q.19 The clause says that even if the live-in relationship existed in any point of time ever in the past, the woman has the rights to complain against the man for domestic violence. This way the woman is given a way to take revenge and extort money legally from the man whom she had a live-in relationship in the past. What do you have to say about this?
Q.20 The clause says that upon the sole testimony of the woman, the court can conclude that domestic violence was committed by the accused. That means the accused is guilty until proven innocent, and the woman need not prove her allegations. Do you think that this approach is as per the legal principles? Are you not taking away the constitutional rights of men? How? This way the bill will be misused just like 498A. What do you think about this?
Q.21 You know 498A is massively misused. You also know that Domestic Violence Bill will also be misused. What do you want to do? Is this how women can be protected by taking away all constitutional rights of men?
Q.22 You said that this bill is only to protect women from domestic violence. But the bill can easily break millions of families. Is this what you want?
Q.23 Many families, lawyers, NGOs all over the country are objecting on the way the bill is drafted. You don’t seem to be worried at all. Do you think their objection is baseless? Are you going to ignore them like you are doing in case of 498A?
Q.24 After all this, do you think you deserve to be the Minister of Women and Child Development? When you have introduced draconian laws like DV Bill and have not amended 498A, you don’t have any rights to ruin Indian family. What do you have to say?
Q.25 Are you not going to step down from the ministry for destroying Indian families and marriage? Why not?
From India, Mumbai
Dear brother Sandipani,
Please find the definition and application if domestic violence below:
"CHAPTER II
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
3.Definition of domestic violence
For the purpose of this Act, any act, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it-
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any dowry or other property or valuable security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause(a) or clause(b) or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.
Explanation I For the purpose of this section,-
(i) “physical abuse†means any act or conduct which is of such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm or danger to life, limb or health or impair the health or development of the aggrieved person and includes assault, criminal intimidation and criminal force;
(ii) “sexual abuse†includes any conduct of a sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise violates the dignity of woman;
(iii) “verbal and emotional abuse†includes-
(a)insults, ridicules, humiliation, name calling and insults or ridicule specially with regard to not having a child or male child; and
(b)repeated threats to cause physical pain to any person in whom th aggrieved person is interested.
(iv) “economic abuse†includes-
(a) deprivation of all or any economic or financial resources to which the aggrieved person is entitled under any law or custom whether payable under an order of a court or otherwise or which the aggrieved person requires out of necessity including, but not limited to, household necessities for the aggrieved person and her children, if any, stridhan, property, jointly or separately owned by the aggrieved person, payment of rental related to the shared household and maintenance;
(b) disposal of household effects, any alienation of assets whether movable or immovable, valuables, shares, securities, bonds and the like or other property in which the aggrieved person has an interest or is entitled to use by virtue of the domestic relationship or which may be reasonably required by the aggrieved person or her children or her stridhan or any other property jointly or separately held by the aggrieved person; and
(c) prohibition or restriction to continued access to resources or facilities which the aggrieved person is entitled to use or enjoy by virtue of the domestic relationship including access to shared household.
ExplanationII: For the purpose of determining whether any act, omission, commission or conduct of the respondent constitutes “domestic violence†under this section, the overall facts and circumstances of the case shall be taken into consideration."
By definition u/s 2 agrieved person is a woman and respondent is a man andit can not be vice versa.
regards"
regards
From India, Delhi
Please find the definition and application if domestic violence below:
"CHAPTER II
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
3.Definition of domestic violence
For the purpose of this Act, any act, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it-
(a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse; or
(b) harasses, harms, injures or endangers the aggrieved person with a view to coerce her or any other person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any dowry or other property or valuable security; or
(c) has the effect of threatening the aggrieved person or any person related to her by any conduct mentioned in clause(a) or clause(b) or
(d) otherwise injures or causes harm, whether physical or mental, to the aggrieved person.
Explanation I For the purpose of this section,-
(i) “physical abuse†means any act or conduct which is of such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm or danger to life, limb or health or impair the health or development of the aggrieved person and includes assault, criminal intimidation and criminal force;
(ii) “sexual abuse†includes any conduct of a sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise violates the dignity of woman;
(iii) “verbal and emotional abuse†includes-
(a)insults, ridicules, humiliation, name calling and insults or ridicule specially with regard to not having a child or male child; and
(b)repeated threats to cause physical pain to any person in whom th aggrieved person is interested.
(iv) “economic abuse†includes-
(a) deprivation of all or any economic or financial resources to which the aggrieved person is entitled under any law or custom whether payable under an order of a court or otherwise or which the aggrieved person requires out of necessity including, but not limited to, household necessities for the aggrieved person and her children, if any, stridhan, property, jointly or separately owned by the aggrieved person, payment of rental related to the shared household and maintenance;
(b) disposal of household effects, any alienation of assets whether movable or immovable, valuables, shares, securities, bonds and the like or other property in which the aggrieved person has an interest or is entitled to use by virtue of the domestic relationship or which may be reasonably required by the aggrieved person or her children or her stridhan or any other property jointly or separately held by the aggrieved person; and
(c) prohibition or restriction to continued access to resources or facilities which the aggrieved person is entitled to use or enjoy by virtue of the domestic relationship including access to shared household.
ExplanationII: For the purpose of determining whether any act, omission, commission or conduct of the respondent constitutes “domestic violence†under this section, the overall facts and circumstances of the case shall be taken into consideration."
By definition u/s 2 agrieved person is a woman and respondent is a man andit can not be vice versa.
regards"
regards
From India, Delhi
Domestic Violence Bill came into effect on 26th October 2006. Some call this Doomsday. Even before one month of its existence, there are already incidents coming to the surface proving the claims of people about the way this bill will be heavily misused. There was already desperate apprehension in the society about this bill, which has not yet been documented by the press media for they have the agenda of appeasing women’s group. Quite obvious.
The victim, obviously not the first and the last victim, is none other than the charismatic Azim Premji, the chairman of Wipro Ltd, who was once the richest man in the country. The way he is falsely implicated under the provision of heavily biased DV Act is as incredible as it gets. Gaurav Nigam, working in Wipro Technologies as a software engineer, is the main accused. His wife, Tripti Nigam, alleges that her husband’s behaviour has changed toward her since he started getting dating allowance from the company. She has alleged that because of the dating allowance, her husband was keeping away from her. For this, she has dragged Wipro chairman Azim Premji and the HRD Head Pratik Kumar as responsible for her husband’s change of behaviour.
Surprisingly, Wipro Ltd has absolutely no such dating allowance given to their employees. They have categorically stated that they don’t have a dating allowance in any form for the employees. So what could be the reason, or should we call, the intention of this Tripti Nigam to drag the company into her personal affairs?
It is pretty understandable that a company as big as Wipro and the chairman so respected and reputed like Azim Premji, any woman would be tempted to use the biased provisions in DV Act to blackmail and extort very large sum of money from Azim Premji.
On this, it would be worth to hear the justification of Renuka Chowdhury who once said, “Good husband will not be harmed” and also “It is not a bad idea if men suffer.” Yes, both the statements are contradictory. This is our Honorable Minister of Women and Child Development of our Country. If Renuka is asked the definition of “Good Husband”, she would not hesitate to say, “Husband who lives like a slave to his wife is a good husband, and so he should not worry at all.” And she will say it smoothly with a little wicked smile on her face.
Tripti observed from her own questionable perception that her husband Gaurav Nigam’s behaviour has changed. Perhaps Gaurav Nigam was way too loving, affectionate, caring and ever ready to fulfill all his wife’s wishes, and when he very slightly deviated from the code of conduct as prescribed by Tripti, she couldn’t wait to test the power of DV Act. She can definitely screw the innocent Gaurav legally, but she seemed to be so greedy that she thought that, “Why not test the power of DV Act on Wipro’s chairman.”
Anyways, the claims of millions of people about Domestic Violence Act are proving right. This Bill will definitely get misused on a massive scale. This Bill is of course enacted exclusively to be misused by women against their vulnerable and defenseless men. If Tripti Nigam goes scot-free after trying to defame Azim Premji and Wipro, then many Tripti will be induced to test the power of DV Act against a little lesser influential man. In short, punish this Tripti Nigam and set an example that will deter other Tripti Nigam to legally harass innocent men. Predictably, press media will continue to prove their loyalty toward women’s group.
New developments have taken place now. Gaurav Nigam said in the press Conference organized by Asha Kiran and Save Indian Family Foundation that he was beaten up by his wife on several occasions. The motive he says was Tripti wanted him to transfer the ownership of the house and car on her name. It seems that Tripti thought that if Gaurav is not willing to transfer the house and car on her name even after beaten him up so violently, why not test the power of DV Act on him and in-laws? After all, she knows that when a woman files a complaint against a man, she is legally not responsible to prove her allegations.
Now her statement has obviously changed since people are no longer jumping to conclusions when a woman files a complaint. Now she says that she contacted Azim Premji to seek guidance on how to force Gaurav to transfer the house and car on her name. Azim Premji thought it would be appropriate to allow the couple to sort out their own problems. Obviously, why would the company, irrespective of its size, intervene in their employee’s marriage dispute? Tripti lost her temper saying how dare he (Azim) dismiss my issue? She and her lawyer cooked up a deceptive plot to drag Azim and Wipro into DV Act not realizing that they will publicly condemned for filing a false DV case.
Now Tripti is trying to cut her loses. She is saying that she doesn’t want to deprive her child the affection and care of his father Gaurav and she wants her husband back. Gaurav was already falsely accused under dowry harassment case IPC 498A and now under DV Act. And when Tripti is realizing that her ways of torturing her husband is backfiring, she now decides to reconcile. Maybe her lawyer must have suggested that after this false DV case is settled and Gaurav comes back and lives a regular life with Tripti, she can plan for another false complaint of IPC 498A and DV Act on her Gaurav without naming anybody else. And then she might be in a position to legally extort the house and car she always wanted, which apparently is more important to her than the father to a child.
Renuka Chowdury once said, “If men suffer, they should speak up.” It seems that Renuka is regretting over her statement. Now men are really breaking their silence and complaining against their wife over domestic violence.
It was long overdue. Men must speak up if they are harassed by their wife.
From India, Mumbai
The victim, obviously not the first and the last victim, is none other than the charismatic Azim Premji, the chairman of Wipro Ltd, who was once the richest man in the country. The way he is falsely implicated under the provision of heavily biased DV Act is as incredible as it gets. Gaurav Nigam, working in Wipro Technologies as a software engineer, is the main accused. His wife, Tripti Nigam, alleges that her husband’s behaviour has changed toward her since he started getting dating allowance from the company. She has alleged that because of the dating allowance, her husband was keeping away from her. For this, she has dragged Wipro chairman Azim Premji and the HRD Head Pratik Kumar as responsible for her husband’s change of behaviour.
Surprisingly, Wipro Ltd has absolutely no such dating allowance given to their employees. They have categorically stated that they don’t have a dating allowance in any form for the employees. So what could be the reason, or should we call, the intention of this Tripti Nigam to drag the company into her personal affairs?
It is pretty understandable that a company as big as Wipro and the chairman so respected and reputed like Azim Premji, any woman would be tempted to use the biased provisions in DV Act to blackmail and extort very large sum of money from Azim Premji.
On this, it would be worth to hear the justification of Renuka Chowdhury who once said, “Good husband will not be harmed” and also “It is not a bad idea if men suffer.” Yes, both the statements are contradictory. This is our Honorable Minister of Women and Child Development of our Country. If Renuka is asked the definition of “Good Husband”, she would not hesitate to say, “Husband who lives like a slave to his wife is a good husband, and so he should not worry at all.” And she will say it smoothly with a little wicked smile on her face.
Tripti observed from her own questionable perception that her husband Gaurav Nigam’s behaviour has changed. Perhaps Gaurav Nigam was way too loving, affectionate, caring and ever ready to fulfill all his wife’s wishes, and when he very slightly deviated from the code of conduct as prescribed by Tripti, she couldn’t wait to test the power of DV Act. She can definitely screw the innocent Gaurav legally, but she seemed to be so greedy that she thought that, “Why not test the power of DV Act on Wipro’s chairman.”
Anyways, the claims of millions of people about Domestic Violence Act are proving right. This Bill will definitely get misused on a massive scale. This Bill is of course enacted exclusively to be misused by women against their vulnerable and defenseless men. If Tripti Nigam goes scot-free after trying to defame Azim Premji and Wipro, then many Tripti will be induced to test the power of DV Act against a little lesser influential man. In short, punish this Tripti Nigam and set an example that will deter other Tripti Nigam to legally harass innocent men. Predictably, press media will continue to prove their loyalty toward women’s group.
New developments have taken place now. Gaurav Nigam said in the press Conference organized by Asha Kiran and Save Indian Family Foundation that he was beaten up by his wife on several occasions. The motive he says was Tripti wanted him to transfer the ownership of the house and car on her name. It seems that Tripti thought that if Gaurav is not willing to transfer the house and car on her name even after beaten him up so violently, why not test the power of DV Act on him and in-laws? After all, she knows that when a woman files a complaint against a man, she is legally not responsible to prove her allegations.
Now her statement has obviously changed since people are no longer jumping to conclusions when a woman files a complaint. Now she says that she contacted Azim Premji to seek guidance on how to force Gaurav to transfer the house and car on her name. Azim Premji thought it would be appropriate to allow the couple to sort out their own problems. Obviously, why would the company, irrespective of its size, intervene in their employee’s marriage dispute? Tripti lost her temper saying how dare he (Azim) dismiss my issue? She and her lawyer cooked up a deceptive plot to drag Azim and Wipro into DV Act not realizing that they will publicly condemned for filing a false DV case.
Now Tripti is trying to cut her loses. She is saying that she doesn’t want to deprive her child the affection and care of his father Gaurav and she wants her husband back. Gaurav was already falsely accused under dowry harassment case IPC 498A and now under DV Act. And when Tripti is realizing that her ways of torturing her husband is backfiring, she now decides to reconcile. Maybe her lawyer must have suggested that after this false DV case is settled and Gaurav comes back and lives a regular life with Tripti, she can plan for another false complaint of IPC 498A and DV Act on her Gaurav without naming anybody else. And then she might be in a position to legally extort the house and car she always wanted, which apparently is more important to her than the father to a child.
Renuka Chowdury once said, “If men suffer, they should speak up.” It seems that Renuka is regretting over her statement. Now men are really breaking their silence and complaining against their wife over domestic violence.
It was long overdue. Men must speak up if they are harassed by their wife.
From India, Mumbai
Find answers from people who have previously dealt with business and work issues similar to yours - Please Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query.
1.Be a Better Boss and not a Bitter Boss.doc
Big-golf-hole_5 51.jpg