When a woman’s testimony becomes the concluding evidence in a rape or molestation case as shown in Amitabh Bachchan starrer Pink that also tries to justify “attempt to murder” on the pretext of molestation it becomes horrendous experience for many innocents. However, it is true that in normal cases the habitual offenders are often rounded up by police for questioning but that does not mean anyone who might have committed other crime (abduction, molestation of Falak in car) would have committed another crime (molestation of Meenal in a resort room) for which the trial was held. Surprisingly, many people who had commented on this article believed that a crime committed later can be the proof of another crime that might have taken place earlier.
A 2014 study by National Law University (NLU), Hyderabad students published in Outllok edition of Dec 2014 showed that Dhananjay Chatterjee was given death sentence in a rape case because of public frenzy built up by media simply because police found the gold chain of the girl in his house. In fact, this study concluded that influential persons who had equal or stronger reasons to be convicted of the same crime had either gone unpunished or less punished. The study pointed out that in most cases of death row convicts their advocates did not fight for them at all.
Another study done by The Hindu in 2015 showed that overwhelmingly large number of rape cases filed in India are sex on the promise of marriage between young couples. The study showed that scripted FIRs are the reason why so many false rape cases are filed. Showing the girl as 14 year old to show sexual assault on a minor, or to show sex on promise of marriage is a norm in such cases. As a result of this a lot of Indian minor boys and men are implicated falsely in rape and molestation cases. Shoojit Sirkar’s Pink just promoted the concept of deciding such crimes based on a woman’s verbal statement which was proved dangerous in many cases in recent past.
Dhananjay Chatterjee was hanged because police found girl’s gold chain from his house
The biggest misuse of such public frenzy and media created hype against a rape was found in case of Dhananjay Chatterjee who was hanged in 2004 for rape and murder of Hetal Parikh in 1990. As the National Law University research showed police only found girl’s gold chain from his house and he was pronounced as the rapist and hanged. Feminists and media had created such a huge public frenzy around that case that the court was pressurized enough to pronounce death penalty.
Sensational Badaun rape and murder was imagination of villagers
Remember the image of two sisters hanging from a mango tree in Badaun, UP. This image was made popular by India Today by promoting that “remember these girls every time you eat a mango”. The very next day when media saw the two girls hanging they created a story of rape and murder because a villager said so. All this happened immediately and without any medical evidence. Later CBI investigation concluded that they had committed suicide and it was not rape as projected by media.
28 Day old baby’s rape in Bulandshahr was imagination of her mother
A rape case was filed against a man who was found roaming around a house and parents filed a complaint saying their 28 day old baby was raped. This created huge ruckus in media confirming the rape based only on the mother’s verbal statement. Later it was found to be diaper rashes. Another example of believing one’s verbal statement.
Park Street rape victim also identified a wrong man as her rapist
The infamous Park Street rape case victim first identified a wrong man as her rapist. When police, media and investigators showed her the photograph of the accused she confirmed many times that the man was guilty unless it was revealed that the man was in US and never came to India or went out of India around the same time. Even though the police later caught the real culprits through investigation, the man was saved only because he was in US. His friends who were in Kolkata that time underwent harsh trial and media and public glare because of a statement.
Niranjan Mandal spent four years in jail for 2006 Mayapuri Rape case
Niranjan Kumar Mandal who ran a diagnostic center in Delhi was arrested and sent to jail for four years based on the testimony of a driver who took his name in sensational Mayapuri Rape case of a deaf and mute woman. In this case someone’s verbal statement had implicated an innocent so badly that he could never regain his lost image and even after acquittal he had to undergo same punishment as society around him had boycott him. He had later asked Supreme Court to return his dignity and filed cases against media for maligning his image.
Sexual assault of a 3 year old Bengaluru school girl in 2014 was her mother’s imagination
The sensational 2014 rape of a 3 year old Bengaluru school girl was imagination of her mother. The mother misconstrued urinary infection in her daughter’s private parts as signs of rape. This had created huge public outrage in Bangalore in Dec 2014, all because of a mother’s statement. Later it was found that Nagraj was not even present in school on the day of the alleged rape. But Nagraj lost everything in his life. He lost his dignity, he lost his job, family everything. Details here
Rohtak Sisters were not bravehearts, they were criminals but not yet punished
We all saw them assaulting three men, but still most of us believed they were innocents and were beating the men on camera because those men were the criminals. This is how Rohtak Sisters, the habitual offender had sought to fame and were given bravery awards by the state women’s commission. When these two women were the real criminals, people who watched them committing the crime believed in their version until of course we fought for the three men.
Jasleen Kaur was an attention seeker but only Sarabjeet Singh is undergoing extreme pain
Jasleen Kaur the AAP attention seeker girl had create 15 minutes of fame unless we exposed her. Media, public everyone believed in her version of the story and concluded Sarabjeet as the offender, until the eye witness came forward in support of Sarabjeet. Jasleen too is not yet punished.
When male feminists are rapists
Khurshid Anwar lived alone in Delhi as he was a divorcee. He was also a women rights crusader and formed Institute for Social Democracy (ISD) to fight for women’s cause. He was accused of rape by a woman from his own NGO. After Nirbhaya incident in Delhi his NGO was at the forefront in Violent Delhi Protests against crimes against women but that was in the morning. The woman alleged that same evening he tried to rape her when she was in an inebriated state. Later the FCRA details of his NGO revealed that funding to his NGO skyrocketed in the year 2012-13.
Another feminist leader Tarun Tejpal too had committed rape in one evening when the same day morning he had hosted a protest meet against rape. He stepped down as Tehelka chief to avoid so many punishments.
Feminists support rapists when rapists are one of them
Feminists who are all praises about the movie Pink, supported the accused whenever the accused was one of them. In both cases of Khurshid Anwar and Tarun Tejpal feminist leaders came forward in their support and tried victim blaming, sexism and all other possible ways to put the victim down. In fact, then these feminists did not bother to respect a woman’s verbal statement.
The same happened for Athlete Pinki Pramanik as well. When Pinki was accused of rape by her live-in partner the leftist feminist brigade of West Bengal went all out to support Pinki and protested against the police investigation and harassment Pinki was going through. All because she was a female.
Movie Pink clearly showed that no one except the individuals knew what happened inside the closed doors of the resort room but surprisingly the court believed the version the women said. However, the version against Andrea told by the man fell flat in court’s eyes.
Some men who commented on this article argued that director Shoojit Sirkar did show both good men (Advct. Sehgal, Neelam’s first boyfriend et.al.) and bad men (Rajveer and friends) and Amitabh’s comments to expose daily sexism against women was not against ALL men.
So what will happen if in reality Meenal files a rape case against her boyfriend (with whom she had her first sex and lost virginity) in the same court under the same judge? First, her statement given in the case shown in the movie will not be considered by the court unless her boyfriend submits a certified copy of her statement in his case. Even then Meenal can always say that she was under threat or something else (she wanted to differentiate between good men and bad men etc. Any change in Meenal’s statement about her first boyfriend will neither change the verdict in the case against Rajveer (because it is unrelated) nor will prove her boyfriend as innocent. In neither of the cases if a woman’s verbal testimony is given prime importance over anything else it becomes extremely dangerous for innocent men simply because they ever had any sexual relation with a woman.
These men who cheer Pink don’t understand the future implications. They don’t understand how people like Niranjan Mandal and Dhananjay Chatterjee get punished because of this feminist agenda of putting a woman’s verbal testimony above everything else. The overwhelming misuse of Indian dowry and rape laws are because of this reason where women’s verbal testimony is making simple household feuds into raging dowry war. But that is not all, the movie Pink has another hidden feminist agenda behind this.
Feminist hidden agenda behind Pink
Currently Supreme Court of India is hearing a PIL filed by feminists in support of waving off the clause in our rape law that gives less punishment for a man if he is in a matrimonial relation with the woman. Feminists want these cases to be called as rape under ‘Marital Rape’ and they want to promote the concept of ‘No means No”. Apparently this may be a harmless concept to everyone but if this becomes a law, then every future Indian divorces will have a marital rape case included. That will not only make India a rape capital of the world, but will also take away their dignified life like the way it did to dowry menace. Marital rape will be another extortion racket to extort money from men whenever their wives think so.
So decide whether you want to cheer the film Pink or expose feminist hypocrisy shown there.