New Jurisprudence of Criminal Liability in Civil Wrongs

Interpretation and pre-judicial review of “Tripple Talaq Ordinance” and criticism of intension of legislature behind the ordinance

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) ordinance, 2018 was promulgated on September 19, 2018. Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2018 was introduced and passed in Lok Sabha on December 28, 2017 and is currently pending in Rajya Sabha. So the state choose the path of ordinance to apply these penal provisions. But this ordinance put a question mark upon the law making process of our country. Law making should not be a subject of emergency, unless and otherwise needed so in the extreme situations. There is no such reason and emergency situation to adopt this path of ordinance to apply penal provisions in hurry in regards to pronouncing of triple talaq by muslim husbands to his wife except dirty politics tricks. Ruling party just want to allure mulsim women votes for the coming state elections going to be held shortly in some states, but they forget that it may be result in to self-goal as a good share of our community (even hindu, muslims or relates to any religion) is showing dissenting views upon the issue of criminal liability in civil wrongs and moreover the way to apply these provisions via ordinance route is also depreciated by the public.

This ordinance compels to legal jurists, activists, judges, academicians, law students and other professionals to think and re-look over the jurisprudence of criminal liability in civil wrongs and to look upon the theories of punishments. There is a need to re-look the extent of criminal liability in civil matters that can be given under some extreme situations. For this, firstly we have to look the extent of civil liability and criminal liability separately.

Civil Liability– civil wrong is a wrong against the private individual and the remedy is damages. The remedy is measured by the wrongful act and the liability depends upon the act not on the intension.

Criminal Liability– Crime is a wrong committed against the society and remedy is punishment. Liability in a crime is measured by the intension of the wrongdoer.

Actus Reus with guilty Mens Rea results in to crime. Unless these both components are not present, an act is not a crime.

A civil wrong ordinarily attracts civil remedy, whereas it attracts penal laws in extreme extraordinary situations, still not too much harsh in that cases also, and only to compel to the wrongdoer to compensate to the remedy seeker as per judgement, decree or order.  And in that case, if wrongdoer provides the remedy at a later stage, even then that criminal liability is suspended.

Pains and Pleasure rule given by “Jeremy Bentham” – If we put this ordinance under the test of rule of pains and pleasure as supported by our renowned jurists and which makes the basis for awarding the punishment, even then this ordinance fails. As per this rule, there will be no pleasure to women in awarding punishment to her husband. Because, after imprisonment, it is must that marital relations will not remain the same and it will tend towards destruction of the marriage and the sole cause for that effect after the imprisonment will be the complaint of such wife made under this ordinance. Thus the pendulum of pain and pleasure will not be balanced under this ordinance and both parties will stand on the same footings of pain and pain only which results in to the dissolution of marriage.   

Presumption of innocence – One of the fundamental Principals of criminal law is that everyone is presumed to be innocent until and unless his guilt is proved by the prosecution. But this ordinance, overrule this presumption also and there is no reason to make this law as exception to the general rule. Under this ordinance a complaint can be made by wife or her blood or marriage relatives and the offence is classified as non-bailable and cognizable offence, which makes this offence grievous in nature. Moreover, the provision of 3 years punishment is too much punitive as this is given in heinous crimes under IPC, like 3 years for rioting armed with deadly weapons, 3 years for imputations to National integration, 2 years for threatening a public servant, 3 years for making, buying or selling instruments for the purpose of counterfeiting coins, 3 years for import or export of counterfeit coins, 2 years for causing death by rash or negligent act, 3 years for attempt to commit culpable homicide, 3 years for causing miscarriage, 3 years for causing hurt with dangerous weapons, 1 to 3 years for sexual harassment to a women.     

It means this ordinance place the husband on the pedestals of grave offender and police can make immediate arrest on mere filling such complaint by wife or her relatives. There is no need for pre- investigation under this ordinance. The husband can apply for bail in the court, that too can be taken by the magistrate only after hearing the women and if he thinks that there are such grounds to release the accused. In no case, it can be assumed that any wife making such complaint against her husband will give evidence in favour of her husband and most likely, she gives the statement that her husband had pronounced triple talaq following the consequences under the ordinance. In that situation, the court having discretion to take bail from the accused, may or may not release the accused upon such bail. It means prima facie, this ordinance overrules the presumption of innocence and presumes the husband guilty until and unless he proves otherwise.

Beyond reasonable doubt

To make a person criminally liable, there is need to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt in strict sense, but it is nowhere mentioned in this ordinance that which situation makes the case proved beyond reasonable doubt by the wife. One thing is sure that courts cannot weave a new story beyond the threads of criminal procedural laws and it will differs from case to case to prove such facts beyond the reasonable doubt. In case, a husband retract his act and refuse to accept that he had pronounced triple talaq to her wife, which will be the most like situation for the sake of preventing himself from the conviction, then it will be difficult to prove the case on merits and on mere suspicion or sole testimony of wife without any corroboration, it will be very difficult to rely on either statement of any party and it must leads to acquittal of accused by giving him benefit of doubt and the purpose of the ordinance will be defeated resulting in to just wastage of time. In rare cases it can be assumed that a husband will admit his guilt or wife have any direct evidence to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, if there is no other witness present and generally, it is also not possible to record such conversations made between husband and wife.

Is Sole testimony of wife without corroboration is sufficient for conviction –  Now the question arises before us that, can a court rely upon sole testimony of wife alleging the facts of pronouncement of triple talaq by her husband to her to convict her husband? Under sec- 134 of Indian evidence act, it is given that no particular number of witness is required to prove the case. It may be one or more. The gravity of this offence is not so much grave that it will compel to state to put the husband behind the bars for three years on mere suspicion and it is just a matter of fact that, whether there is any harm done to wife by the husband by such act, if so, then it must be corrected. But as discussed, in the case of lack of evidences, it will be almost impossible to prove the beyond the reasonable doubt and acting blindly by the courts to just achieve the corrupted target of ordinance on relying upon sole testimony of wife will further leads to destruction of society only.    

Ruling in Shayara bano case – In this case, Supreme Court negate the effect of triple talaq and held that it has no effect on the subsisting marital relationship and the words of Supreme Court seems to be consonance with the state responsibility to save the marriage generally. Two of five Judges bench held that triple talaq is unconstitutional and one judge held it as anti – Islamic practices being not a part of Holy Quran. The majority opinion of the court seems to accept the state responsibility of saving marriage, but the state itself keep their foot at deviance and stands apart from its responsibility, because they don’t focus on saving the marriage but to convict the husband only. Can we assume that when a triple talaq have no effect upon the marital relationship, even then a wife will make such complaint to just convict her husband? Can conviction be a motive of wife, who wants to live in conjugal relations with her husband? Is conviction resolve the conflict between the parties? If answer to these questions are not affirmative, then what is the need of this ordinance?

Comparison with other personal laws and our Constitutional provisions – In our country, a major part of population is governed by Hindu Laws. If we compare the Hindu Laws and this ordinance then we found no parity between these laws. Under the Hindu Laws, Divorce is possible by court proceedings only and in case if either party desert the company of other then the defendant have the remedies of either restitution, maintenance or divorce in unavoidable situations. The court do every effort to bring the party on parity and remove all the doubts from their minds and purpose of this act is mainly to save the marriage. The court move ahead towards the divorce proceedings only when such a situations arises that a marriage is breakdown irretrievably and there is no chance of re-union of both parties.

Surprisingly, on the one hand, Article – 44 of Indian Constitution puts the responsibility upon the state to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code and ruling party have uniform civil code as one of its three core issues upon which they are contesting their previous elections and on the other hand, state supports for such sparingly and defective laws and choose the divergent path instead of making universal personal laws. This seems just dirty politics tricks and nothing more but I surprised, how a Govt. can choose divergent path from the directions of the supreme power of the Nation i.e. our Constitution.         

Adverse effects – As discussed above in detail, the intension of the legislation behind this ordinance is not constitutional. It may be strike down by the Supreme Court, if challenged upon above discussed grounds. Moreover, there is no reason to believe that this ordinance will serve the society in a better way than earlier situations, because the very purpose of this ordinance is just to put the husband behind the bars only, which is not correct intension. A husband arrested under this ordinance, upon a false or vexatious complaint may also lose his job and he will surely lose his name and fame that he have earned in the society. There is no pre-checks to prevent for filling of false or vexatious complaints and the husband will become just a puppet of his wife.

Criticism and conclusion – I strongly criticize this practice of state for developing a new jurisprudence of criminal liability in civil wrong as there is no need to take such steps and that too in such an emergency mode that they had choose the ordinance path instead of making debate in the upper house, where they know that it is difficult to get it pass without the support of opposition. Discussion is not bad and it should not be avoided in a democratic nations like ours. Sometimes, a remedy is worse than a disease, and it will be proved by the aftermath of this ordinance.

Identification in Fake Artificial World


Today, everyone is on the web. Children, teenagers, adults and even old age persons find some stuff on the web in this artificial world. Children are master in web games, but unfortunately they are losing the skills in physical games and activities. Teenagers easily caught in chat rooms on social web sites like Facebook, Instagram and many others, which in reality, is of no use except wastage of their precious time of studies. Moreover, premature youngsters are heavily addicted to watch adult stuff and porn sites, which is the worst effect of advanced technologies without any check and it seems like a horse without reins.

Valid Credentials:

Recently, center govt. has told to the Supreme Court that they cannot curb the problem of watching porn by youngsters. But I asked why they can’t? Definitely they can do. Actually the problem is that there is no check on the KYC of the users, while surfing online on the internet. As the govt. claims that they get a big success to destroy as near as 15 Lakhs fake pan cards by just linking them with Aadhar card, they can make Aadhar card or any other credentials like Aadhar card mandatory to use internet.

Linking of Aadhar card is not possible in case of foreigner users to Indian web sites and having valid credentials while login to international web sites is not possible as they are run and control outside the India. But we can set some similar valid credentials like passport or globally acceptable identification proof for such purpose. Excuse of having no such valid credential in this digital world is nothing but a fraud with the govt. and other people to whom we interact daily.

According to various surveys and data available, there are millions of fake accounts at social web sites. People use fake accounts to hide their identity and creating fake name and accounts leads to several types of crimes. The person, who makes such fake Id’s, should be prosecuted for the offence of cheating by personation under section 416 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. Moreover Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and several other web sites companies also should be prosecuted for the abetment of cheating by personation as they influence to the others and promote these activities.

Recently news is burning oil in regards to fake retweets by followers of Rahul Gandhi in reply to Rahul Gandhi’s messages of twitter and surprisingly, congress spokesperson said with a great honour that it is just a part of marketing as like our Hon’ble Prime Minister Narender Modi Ji do. After listening these comments, I am compelled to think that how low the level of our politics has gone. According to my views, whether you are P.M. or opposition leader or a common man, you can do marketing in a fair manner but by not making fools to the general public and now it is proved by their self statements that they use the technique of fake accounts on twitter and facebook to make billions of their followers and to send – receive fake messages and tweets. By this they just want to show the common voters that how popular they are, but in-fact they are cheating to the common man for the lure of vote bank. This is not marketing. One should let them know the difference between marketing and cheating tricks. They are doing only unfair trade practices which leads to derogation of dignity of our India Constitution.

Suppose, if all fake Id’s are removed from facebook, google, twitter and all other social web sites and it is made mandatory to use a valid credential to login on any social web site then you can blindly faith upon the data available on internet. You can frequently make social commitments, commercial and personal contracts with these persons without any threat of cyber crime. You will be no more victims of fake commercial practices by fraud persons, fake relations in societies and sexual harassment in the face of fake marriage promises etc.

Status of Minors:

Mohiri Bibi V. Dharmodas Ghosh is a very old and famous case related to British era and it is still used as precedent and frequently referred by our benches to discard the minor contracts. It is a matter of discussion that when a minor is not eligible to make a contract in the real word, then how can we allow to a minor to be a party in the contracts in this artificial world as this artificial world has more significance in our today life. How can we allow to these minors to be a victim by fake identities, whenever they are protected by the laws in the real world. I am surprised to see today that the trend of facebook account is increased in such a way that some peoples are so curious to make a new facebook account of their new born babies even when the mother is frequent with child in her womb. Can anybody tell me that what these babies have to do with these facebook accounts and what is the real purpose of uploading the pics of new born babies by creating a facebook accounts of infants and whether these infants are legally eligible to make a facebook account. Indirectly we are just increasing the blanket data of no use. If still we want to make such accounts, then I highly recommend that these accounts should not be open without any valid credentials and no duplicates should be made. Still I want to thanks these persons, at least they have started to accept the existence of a child in womb of mother in indirect way otherwise this issue was a big black spot in our societies in the face of many other social evils. These matters need a heated discussion at national level and it should be a matter of concern that what we are giving to our coming generations. It should be discussed at length that whether we moving in the right direction. These topics are too lengthy to discuss here. Public should raise their voice to discuss these issues and our legislators should make these topics as agenda of their tables. But unfortunately they have no time to discuss these very important issues, which are giving a drastically effect on our coming economical and social conditions. Because they are too much busy to discuss cow, buffalo, dog, beef ban, religious matters and many other such stupid issues. They just want to keep the public busy in these issues, which will never be solved and their shops for votes run for a long time.

Social Stigma:

We are developing the technologies but we are too much illiterate to use it. We should think to secure the technology also otherwise this will burst like Nagasaki atom bomb on our society which leaves its effect over many generations. Protecting the society from this social stigma is our duty. People are living in artificial world today but they don’t know how to live in this artificial world. This is somewhat different from the real world. Without webcam you cannot physically see to other person engaged with you on the internet and we are engaged with others on the internet in such a way that we are making friends, making personal and social contracts, and moreover we are promising to each other for marriage also without any verification. From the start of good morning, news paper reading, day shopping, lunch, snacks, friends chat, group messaging etc everything is going on web and these activities have a greater impact on our daily lives. So the significance of correct Id’s on the web has increased much more. Our lawmakers should think about it seriously with immediate solution to diagnose this plague. They are still unsuccessful to curb the problem of cyber scam, but this idea can open a new door to solve the issue of cyber scam threat to the society.



Dimple Jindal




“RAPE” committed by our Legislators with sec. – 375 of IPC

rapeAfter the Nirbhaya Delhi Gang Rape case, “The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013” came in to force w.e.f 3rd of Feb, 2013. Now this case was recorded as “Rarest of Rare case” in the history of Indian Judiciary case laws. Our parliament was forced by the street protesters to take immediate initiatives towards making the drastic changes in our criminal laws. By this amendment act, our legislators introduced some new sections and make some amendments in Indian Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Indian Evidence Act and Protection of children from sexual offences act. New Sections 166A, 166B, 326A, 326B, 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D are inserted in Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), Sections 198B, 357B, 357C are inserted in Code of Criminal Procedure (1973), Section 53A inserted in Indian Evidence Act (1872), whereas several amendments to some sections in these acts were also made by this amendment act. Section 375, 376, 376 A, 376 B, 376 C, 376 D substituted with new one and a new section 376 E was inserted through the same amendment act. Section 375 of IPC (which provides the definition of Rape) goes with drastic change through this amendment act. By this amendment, the definition of Rape was totally changed and its meaning was also changed. Our Legislators put excessive efforts to make amendment in section 375 and after reading the amended definition of rape given under section 375 of IPC, one is compelled to think that what has happened to the art of drafting and where it has gone? Are we so incapable to even draft a law, which make some sense? Interpretation of Statute by the courts is also a great art, which removes the ambiguity in the wording of the statutes giving different meaning in changing situations. But it does not mean that we leave a Patent ambiguity in the statutes and confer a duty upon the Judges & courts to interpret it and give proper meaning to the statute to show the proper object of the legislator. The patent ambiguity should always be removed while making the statute only and it should be the exceptional case, where a latent ambiguity shows from the wording of the statute in the changing circumstances. In that case, it should be the duty of the court to make every endeavour to interpret the statute under the object of the legislator and to make the statute best fit in that every changing situation.
Before passing the act, the definition of Rape is changed and the name of offence was made “Sexual Assault” which replaces the word “Rape” and it is common for man to man, man to woman, woman to woman and woman to man but when the ordinance converts in to act 2013, the word Rape re- changed with the word “sexual assault” & the offence remains punishable for man towards woman only.
This new definition of Rape is criticized by me at some words used by the Legislators unnecessarily.
1. In the new definition, the legislators uses the words, “Vagina, Mouth, Urethra or Anus” in clause (a) and “Vagina, Urethra or Anus” for the clause (b), (c), (d) of section – 375. Before interpreting this definition, we should firstly come to know the proper meaning of these words specifically used by the legislator in the statute. As per Oxford dictionary, Wikipedia and other national & international dictionaries, Urethra is a layer of skin inside the Vagina, means Urethra is covered by the outer layer of Vagina. According to my view, there is no need to use the word “Urethra” specifically. Vagina covers this part in itself as no penetration is possible physically without penetrating anything in to Vagina but to Urethra only (Urethra always comes after the Vagina).
2. Secondly, under section 375 (c), the Legislator criminalize the art of manipulation under the definition of Rape. In this case, now it becomes very difficult to distinguish between “Rape” and “Attempt to Rape” as attempt to rape is already a complete offence in itself and it should be punishable only under section 511 of IPC r/w section 376 of same code and not under the category of Rape. The reason is that, on the one hand we are trying to make the Rape Law as a hard law and on the other hand we are making the no difference between the main offence and attempt to that offence. Even in IPC, there is lesser punishment for attempt to murder as comparable to the main offence of murder. Another reason is that, by bringing the offence of “manipulation only” under the category of Rape, it broadened the ambit of act of Rape unnecessarily on the one hand and provides hard punishment for the less gravity offence on the other hand.
3. Thirdly, the Legislator uses the word, “any part of the body of such women”. It is quite funny to imagine that is there any other part left apart from Vagina, Urethra, Mouth or Anus where the penetration can be possibly made for the sexual purpose. What is the intention of Legislator by using these words here, is the Legislator want to say ear, nose or any other part? It is a bad drafting. Here it seems that Legislator had put excessive and unnecessary efforts to just make the offence of Rape harder. And these excessive efforts made the statute patent ambiguous.
4. Fourthly, the Legislator uses the words, “or any other person” in each four clauses of section 375. Earlier Gang Rape is defined under clause (g) of section 375. But after the amendment of 2013, it is separately defined under section 375 D. The requirement of minimum persons under section 375 D is two, for converting the offence of Rape in to Gang Rape and there is no need of sexual penetration by the both accused but only assistance of one person to the main culprit is enough to make them offender under this section. By using the words “any other person” the Legislator himself makes the both definitions of section 375 and section 375 D as overlapping upon each other. It is a big defect in the definition of Rape given under section 375 as it creates ambiguity in the statute that if one person assists to the offender to commit the offence of Rape, then whether they will be convicted under section 375 or under section 375 D (i.e. which provides punishment for gang rape).
As per above analysis of the amended definition of Rape given under section 375, it is evident clear that how efficient our Legislator are. It must be carefully examined before drafting any statute as the impact of bad drafting may results in to grave consequences. I suggest that there is a need of more involvement of Common man specially Law Graduates either practicing or Teaching or Research fellows in the law making process and they should come forward to give their suggestions. Legislators should make this involvement easy and friendly and must be in a transparent manner which serves many purposes with single act i.e. involvement of common man in law making process, improvement of efficiency, uplift of backward society, improvement in confidence in common man & improvement in education etc. by just giving them suggestive powers only.
This new definition of Rape is badly drafted and it looks by the above analysis that Legislator has committed Rape with section 375 and unfortunately there is no punishment for this offence in Indian Laws but some innocents or less offenders may amounts to harder punishment due to this ambiguity.

Dimple Jindal (Advocate)
(M.B.A, LL.B, B.Com)
Distt. Courts, Barnala.

Right to Service Act, 2011

Right-to-Service-Commission……… A weapon to eliminate the corruption.

The Right to Service Act, 2011 has empowered people to seek hassle free, corruption free and time bound service delivery mechanism in the govt. offices. The main objective of this Act is to deliver time bound services without any hassle, which also improves the credibility of the govt. offices. This act ensures the fast working and brings more transparency and credibility in official working of govt. departments. We can say that this Act is one step ahead to Right to Information Act, 2005 and this Act is a strong weapon to eliminate the corruption from the Govt. offices, to bring transparency in the official working and to enhance accountability of the Public Servant.

Emergence of the Act in Punjab. :-
With a ambition to provide delivery of services to the people of the states within stipulated/ reasonable time Punjab Govt. notified Right to Service Ordinance on 14/7/2011. The Ordinance came into force w.e.f. 28th July, 2011 when 67 services were notified under its provisions. Soon after, Punjab Right to Service Act-2011 (PRTS Act-2011) was passed by the State Assembly and thus, came into effect on 20th October, 2011.

Punjab Right to Service Act Commission: –
As per Section 12 of the PRTS Act-2011, there is a provision to constitute Punjab Right to Service Commission (PRTSC) consisting of 1 Chief Commissioner and 4 Commissioners who would look after the task of effective implementation of the Act.

PRTSC has been entrusted with the task of making suggestions to the state government for ensuring better delivery of services. The Commission will also hear revision applications against the orders of 2nd Appellate Authority. The Commission has been constituted since 23 Nov, 2011.

Scenario of the whole nation: –
Center Govt Bill: Citizen’s Charter and Grievance Redressal Bill 2011
The Citizen’s Charter and Grievance Redressal Bill 2011 also known as The Right of Citizens for Time Bound Delivery of Goods and Services and Redressal of their Grievances Bill, 2011 or Citizens Charter Bill was proposed by Indian central legislation. It was tabled by V. Narayanasamy, Minister of State for Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, in Lok Sabha in December 2011. The bill lapsed due to dissolution of the 15th Lok Sabha.

State Acts: –
Madhya Pradesh became the first state in India to enact Right to Service Act on 18 August 2010 and Bihar was the second to enact this bill on 25 July 2011. After that several other states like Bihar, Delhi, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Rajasthan, Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, Karnatka, Chhattisgarh, Jammu & Kashmir, Orissa, Assam, Gujrat, West Bengal, Goa and Maharashtra have introduced similar legislation for effectuating the right to service to the citizen. In Punjab, it is named “Right to Service Act, 2011”. In Delhi, it is named as “Delhi (Right of Citizen to Time Bound Delivery of Services) Act, 2011”. And in other states it is named on different names and comes in to force on different dates.


Penal Provisions: –
Right to Public Services legislation in India comprises statutory laws which guarantee time bound delivery of services for various public services rendered by the Government to citizen and provides mechanism for punishing the errant public servant who is deficient in providing the service stipulated under the statute. Right to Service legislation are meant to reduce corruption among the government officials and to increase transparency and public accountability.

The common framework of the legislations in various states includes, granting of “Right to public services”, which are to be provided to the public by the designated official within the stipulated time frame. The public services which are to be granted as a right under the legislations are generally notified separately through Gazette notification. Some of the common services which are to be provided within the fixed time frame as a right under the Acts, includes issuing caste, birth, marriage and domicile certificates, electric connections, voter’s card, ration cards, copies of land records, etc.

On failure to provide the service by the designate officer within the given time or rejected to provide the service, the aggrieved person can approach the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority, after making a hearing, can accept or reject the appeal by making a written order stating the reasons for the order and intimate the same to the applicant, and can order the public servant to provide the service to the applicant.

An appeal can be made from the order of the First Appellate Authority to the Second Appellate Authority, who can either accept or reject the application, by making a written order stating the reasons for the order and intimate the same to the applicant, and can order the public servant to provide the service to the applicant or can impose penalty on the designated officer for deficiency of services without any reasonable cause, which can range from Rs. 500 to Rs. 5000 or may recommend disciplinary proceedings. The applicant may be compensated out of the penalty imposed on the officer. The Appellate Authorities has been granted certain powers of a civil court while trying a suit under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, like production of documents and issuance of summon to the Designated officers and appellants.

Not so popular – need to publicise: –
Due to lack of awareness, this act is not too much known to every Person. Even this act is not passed by some states of India till now. In states, where this Act is passed by the Govt., there are not so many complaints lodged by the People. Govt. should arrange for the awareness seminars of Right to Service Act at public places. Colleges, Societies and Other Institutions should come forward for the arrangement of these seminars, which will bring more awareness in the public and create a fear in the mind of Public servant to perform his duty within stipulated time.

Comparison of Right to Service Act with other Statutes: –
Right to service Act is one step ahead of Right to Information Act, 2005 & Prevention of Corruption Act to make hassle free, corruption free and fast working in the govt. offices. The procedure of Trial and investigation under Prevention of Corruption Act is lengthy and time consuming. While Right to Information Act, 2005 proves a milestone to bring transparency in the official workings. Right to Service Act will prove another milestone in removing the corruption from the govt. offices. But it will take time as the public is not fully aware from this Act. The powers are completely in the hands of public by the provisions of this Act. The Public officer is duty bound to do his duty within stipulated time with no other option to avoid the penalty. Right to Information Act, 2005 brings only transparency but Right to Service Act makes the working fast (in a reasonable time).

Services under this Act.: –
Initially, 65 services were notified by the govt., while starting the act. But now these services are increased to 351 services. There is a provision to include more services in the ambit of this act by the govt. in the future also.

Time limit for some services :

Taking the copies of fard, jamabandi from the revenue department – 1 day
Registration of all kind of documents such as Sale deed, Lease Deed, GPA Partnership Deed – 1 day
Taking copies of Birth / Death Certificate – 2 days for current year/ 5 days for previous years.
Taking copy of Post mortem report – 3 days.
Issuing of Driving License – 7 days.
Sanction of building plan – 30 days.

Conclusion: –
If this act is passed in every state Assembly of India and as a Center Govt. Act (in both Upper and Lower House) also and by awareness programmes, we make this Act familiar to every citizen, then every public servant have a fear in his/her mind while performing his duty. He/ She will not keep pending any matter as he/ she knows that it would attract penalty in contravenes of this Act.

Secondly, this will remove corruption from the offices. I think corruption free India is a dream of every citizen. Corruption is the main hindrance in the development of the nation. Earlier, the govt. officials have a routine to keep pending the matters for so many months with them and people opt. the method of “Money Mantra” to do the work done easier or even in off time working hours. In that case, these public servants give their personal attention and serve the people in the off time also, because they know that they will get extra money for that duty. So this is a routine in the govt. offices to make the case pending and collect the money to do the duty fast. By this Act, this practise will be stopped. So this Act will prove a strong weapon to remove the corruption from the govt. offices and will ensure the fast working in these offices.

Appeal to all Citizens: –
I make an appeal to every citizen and reader of this article to start a new wave of publicising this Act to unknown persons (specially to illiterate persons). If we come forward and join our hands to do this, Surely one day our country will be corruption free and the environment of our govt. offices will be different from today.

Reservation Policy in India – A Serious Threat To The Nation

reservationReservation policy was made to uplift the weaker and poor section of community upwards and to give the equal status to these people at par to other rich and high society communities. With the passage of time and upon demand of other communities, more castes were added time to time under this policy to give them benefit. But this policy becomes a serious threat to the nation now. Meritorious students/candidates are losing jobs and opportunities due to this policy. Political pundits are the main culprits of this policy. They do not want the welfare of the people but they work only for their vote bank. In India, majority remains with illiterate and poor people. The Political leaders misguide them on this issue. They offer reservation to them in every sector, whether it is job recruitment or job promotion. They stands upfront from the other meritorious students of general category under this policy. Moreover, a reserved category candidate can enter in the shoe of general category also but not vice versa.

I am not against the reservation policy. But I want some amendments in this policy. It is undoubtedly right that when this policy was frame, the country was really in need of this policy. There was a very big discrimination between the upper and lower castes, which compels to the people for the agitations and which results in to this policy. The main purpose of this policy was to diminish the gap between the upper and lower castes. That was the demand of that time. But now, meritorious candidates are getting affected in a big way now. Some times a general category candidate works for his/her whole life as a class 4/5 employee, but in the same conditions the other candidate of reserved category got promotions and promotions and sit at the top position of the departments. This is not fare. This policy is mentally torturing to the general candidates. But they can not do anything.
Let me tell, if we place a candidate with 33% or 40% marks in medical college instead of 75% of general category candidate, they how can we expect that he will treat the patient in efficient manner.
If we place a reserved category candidate with lower marks like as above instead of meritorious student in a engineering college, then how can we expect a better development in our infrastructure or how can we expect that our Nation will stand at par with other developed nations. More worse than this, our meritorious candidates are not well paid in country. They are compelled to go outside of Indian origin for the higher salaries and they have no other option to leave their homes and their families. Even these candidates are sit at top CEO positions in U.S. or in other countries, and think if they were given proper opportunity in India, they can shine our country. Meritorious candidates are lying vacant in the lines of unemployed youths or compelled to do the job on lower salaries. On the same time, unparalleled candidates with the stamp of reservation stands in upfront positions.
My views:
I strongly support my issue that only one family member should be given the benefit of this policy and this benefit would be given for one time only. I wonder when a candidate is uplift by this policy, then why he/ she needs the benefit of the reservation in future at every step of his/her life. We have made them dependent for the whole life. They have forget to live with out the help of stick of reservation. Once a candidate uplifted, he or she stands on the equal footage of upper category castes. And after that he or she should be promoted only if he/ she deserves. This is not a way to promote the nation. If we want to promote the nation on the right path, We need efficient candidates not reserved candidates. I again tell here that I am not against the policy of reservation, but I advocacy for the amendments in the policy, which is the demand of time. We should build the nation with efficient candidates and proper salaries should be given to them so that, they can earn necessaries and luxuries according to their family living standard and they did not think to leave the country for the better opportunities in abroad.

I am sure this will be the right step towards the improvement of environment of govt. offices also. Because right man will be placed at right position and they will work in right direction.
If we expect the political leaders will move for this amendment, they will never do this. Because they divide the people on the issue of caste and religion and rule over them. This is the main reason that why they are not real well wishers of the country.

Rest of this, I acknowledge here that these are my personal views seeking the better growth of the nation and my purpose is not to hurt any one feelings. My purpose is also not to degrade any community. I think that each and every people who take birth in this world is a son of God. There should be no discrimination on this chapter. Modi Ji is requesting to every people to leave their subsidy, I suggest them that he and their party workers should request to the people to leave the benefit of reservation. This will be the right step and this will start from our self only. Do not expect the political help on this chapter.

My concern is all about follows
1. Son or Daughter of a person, who have already take reservation benefit and sit at the gazetted post really needs reservation or not.

2. Where would economically backward people of general category goes. They can neither get reservation benefit nor any type of financial help.

3. Is giving priority to sc/bc student who have got 35% or 40% marks instead of meritorious student from general category who got 75% above marks right or wrong? Are we building a better nation by placing these unqualified persons on the top posts? Is is justified for the general category students? Can A Doctor saves a serious patient, A Engineer make a better infrastructure, A Judge give justice to the innocent person if all these are employed through the channel of reservation mode? Are they equally efficient to give services comparable to meritorious students?

This is a serious matter of concern and it should be discussed on the level of advisory committees. I know, it is very difficult to amend this policy, because political pundits are the main culprits and they do not want to close their vote bank. Even they did not want to educate the general people, because if the common man get educated, they will not caught in their false promises and they will demand transparency in the official working system. Political parties are highly corrupted and Indian common man is not so educated. Mainly people belongs to villages. They concern to earning bread only. They did not bother for big scams and these political parties are taking benefit from these peoples. They makes big promises for the vote in election, and after elections they did not come to their constituency. Right to Information Act, 2005 brings some awareness in the public, but these parties are not ready to give information under preview of this act. Can they tell to the general public at the time of election, what is the problem of political parties to object the RTI act for the political parties. They really did not want to work in transparent manner.

While making the Constitution, the position of Dalits, backward classes was really very bad. But this policy was made for the period of tens years only. After the passing of 68 years of Independence of India, I think We have came almost in our third generation. Backward class came in front or not, but the situation of economically backward is still bursting. It’s need of time to re think the policy. I make an appeal to every reader of this article, support this voice and forward this message to more and more, so that it becomes voice of India. This is difficult but not impossible. Freedom was also difficult, but we got it after very hard struggle. Now the time again demands for the struggle. So, prepare yourself for this fight against political leaders and criticizers. Make open debates, discussions, take reviews from the panels, join some expert groups and let make this as a national issue of debate. This will surely help in removing this cancer from the Indian Constitution.