This section is to cover various activities by various NGO working for men on social media. This won't be a separate section but will be an integral part of other topics.
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1st, 2022
Editorial
Issue 26rd of Men’s HUB is in your hand. If you did not notice I would like to inform you that the domain name (website url) which we were using earlier is no longer in use, we have already shifted to a new domain http://menshub.co.in Men’s Hub was started with a solo motive to provide a platform for everyone, everyone including professional as well as non-professional writers. During the last 5
years we have seen many changes, some of them for good reason. One of the major changes was url shifting. Now we have shifted to a new url with full strength.
The men’s HUB was an initiative to encourage a common man to share his experience without thinking about his capabilities. With a large number of new writers coming forward to share their experience, we can say we are doing good as long as our target is common men. Articles in Hindi or English shared by various readers as well as professional authors are published in the present issue. These articles covered various aspects of life including corona. Although we are morally bound to stay with our main objective but to cover more areas we our-self limited to number or articles or number or pages. In any edition we limit our-self to cover 3 to 4 articles in max 20 pages.
This is the last issue of the year 2022. Next issue will be in new year and now in the end I would like to wish every reader a very very Happy Diwali and wishes for coming year.
1
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1st, 2022
Index
1
Law News
4
2
Crime News
10
3
Open letter to the Hon'ble CJI against HC order al owing charge U/s 16
376 of IPC against husband
4
I Fear
19
5
NCRB - Suicide
21
6
रावण संवाद
29
7
Suicide Tendency Not Limited to Life
32
8
When I Was 4 Year Old
36
9
We are Losing a Whole Generation of Young Men 39
10
Raja Rani - Suicide
42
11
िज़ंदा हूँ म!!!!
47
12
Ravan – Casual Misandry 01
50
13
Ravan – Casual Misandry 02
51
14
Ravan – Casual Misandry 03
52
15
Ravan – Casual Misandry 04
53
16
Ravan – Casual Misandry 05
54
1
Menʼs HUB 26
17
Ravan – Casual Misandry 06
56
18
Ravan – Casual Misandry 07
57
19
Ravan – Casual Misandry 08
58
20
Ravan – Casual Misandry 09
59
21
Ravan – Casual Misandry 10
60
22
माफ
62
23
ववाह एवं तलाक
64
24
Who Care for My Safety
75
25
Keshav & Sharma : EP 068 – Dushera & Ravan 77
26
01 - हंगामा
79
27
आजाद प रंदा – आ म नभर
81
28
02 - हंगामा
93
29
दोगलापन
95
30
मुदा िज म
96
31
दु मनी
98
32
वक प
101
33
एक कदम आजाद क और
102
34
आंदोलन
103
35
K & S - Men's Death Rate
105
36
शाह जी
107
37
I Don’t Fight to Protect
109
38
04.रंग बरंगे लोग
112
39
वो आ रह है - 02 राणा वज संह
114
2
Menʼs HUB 26
3
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1st, 2022
Law News
WhatsApp group administrator cannot be held vicariously liable for content posted by group member
Kishor Tarone Vs State of Maharashtra
Bombay HC, Nagpur Bench
01/03/2021
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 573 OF 2016
A WhatsApp group is such that its administrator does not have power to regulate, moderate or censor the content before it is posted on the group, the Court noted.
The administrator of a group on messaging application, WhatsApp cannot be held liable for objectionable content posted by members of the group, the Court ruled
4
Menʼs HUB 26
Law News
A WhatsApp group is such that its administrator does not have power to regulate, moderate or censor the content before it is posted on the group, the Court opined.
If a member of the Whatsapp group posts any content, which is actionable under law, such person who puts such posts can be held liable under relevant provisions of law, the Court clarified.
"(But) In the absence of a specific provision in law creating vicarious liability, an administrator of a Whatsapp group cannot be held liable for objectionable content posted by a member of a group," the Court underscored.
In the absence of a specific provision in law creating vicarious liability, an administrator of a Whatsapp group cannot be held liable for objectionable content posted by a member of a group. - Bombay High Court
The Court, therefore, quashed the First Information Report (FIR), chargesheet and further proceedings arising against the administrator of a WhatsApp group who was charged with offences under Sections 354A (passing sexual y coloured remarks) and 509 (insult modesty of woman) of the Indian Penal Code and Information Technology Act and proceedings arising from them.
The petitioner, Kishor Tarone, had chal enged the FIR and chargesheet filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Gondia.
The accusations against Tarone was that as a WhatsApp group administrator, he had not removed the primary accused of the case from the group nor asked the accused to submit an apology for using filthy language against the complainant, a female member of the group.
5
Menʼs HUB 26
Law News
The Court observed that a group administrator cannot be held vicariously liable for an act of member of the group, who posts objectionable content, unless it is shown that there was common intention or pre-arranged plan between the members and administrator.
"When a person creates a Whatsapp group, he cannot be expected to presume or to have advance knowledge of the criminal acts of the member of the group," the judgment stated.
From the facts of the present case, the Court opined that even if the al egations in the FIR and the material in the charge-sheet are considered as true, the ingredients of the offence al eging passing of sexual remarks under the Indian Penal Code are not fulfil ed.
"When a person creates a Whatsapp group, he cannot be expected to presume or to have advance knowledge of the criminal acts of the member of the group."
"Non-removal of a member by administrator of a Whatsapp group or failure to seek apology from a member, who had posted the objectionable remark, would not amount to making sexual y coloured remarks by administrator," the Court stated and quashed and set aside the proceedings against the petitioner.
6
Menʼs HUB 26
Law News
Recovery proceeding under Domestic Violence Act only an ancillary proceeding, not a bar to subsequent adjudication by family court Mahin Kutty Vs Anshida
Kerala HC
09/04/2021
Mat. Appeal. No. 739 OF 2014
The High Court has held that recovery proceedings instituted under Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act would not operate as a bar on a Family Court adjudication of the matter.
The Court ruled that proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act were ancil ary to the main inquiry of whether the woman faced domestic violence in the home.
Therefore, the court said, "The substantial issue in a proceedings under Section 20 must be domestic violence. The relief of monetary claims under Section 20 is ancil ary relief. Therefore, the outcome in ancil ary proceedings, that too in the proceedings in the nature of inquiry itself wil not bar the Family Court or any other competent court having power to adjudicate such dispute."
7
Menʼs HUB 26
Law News
The Court emphasized that the principle of res judicata "barred a court from adjudicating the same issue which has been conclusively decided by the competent forum or court between the same parties."
The Court underscored that any adjudication necessarily involved deciding the rights and obligations of the parties before it. Because there was no adjudication of rights or obligations under the Domestic Violence Act, there was no adjudication.
"If no right of the parties is decided conclusively in the proceedings, then outcome, if any, of such proceedings cannot be treated as an outcome of adjudication," the judgment states
What was envisaged under the Act was an inquiry, an inquisitorial procedure, rather than another platform for the adjudication of disputes, the bench additional y points out in the judgment.
Laying stress on the fact that the Domestic Violence Act was beneficial and intended to protect women from domestic violence, the Court said, "The very objective of the Act is to protect the women as against the violence that occurs within the family and for matters connected therewith.
The Act, therefore, conceives a scheme of protective measures with an object to protect women. The scheme of the Act on a close scrutiny, would reflect the intention of the parliament, that it was not enacted to create another platform for adjudication of disputes arising out of any matrimonial dispute, but to take measures to protect the women. The proceedings are therefore, understood as supplemental provisions besides the right to adjudicate any dispute arising out of a matrimonial relationship as conferred under law before the competent civil court or Family Court or criminal court. The protective measures as required to be passed may include residential orders, monetary reliefs, custody orders etc. The 8
Menʼs HUB 26
Law News
objective criteria in such proceedings is to protect the women and not to adjudicate upon the dispute."
After these findings, the Court proceeded to dismiss the appeal before it.
The Court's observations were in response to an appeal filed by a husband whose wife had filed a petition before a Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court for the recovery of her money and gold ornaments under Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act. After the Section 20 petition was rejected, she filed a petition seeking the same relief in a Family Court. The husband's preliminary objection to the Family Court's competence to decide the case was dismissed. Aggrieved, he moved the High Court.
Taking the stance that the proceedings before the Magistrate were supplemental to the larger inquiry of whether there was domestic violence, the Court dismissed the appeal.
The Court pointed out that the outcome of the inquiry proceedings would be relevant while deciding the dispute in subsequent proceedings before the Family Court, which was empowered to decide upon matters relating to the home and family. "The Apex Court in Satish Chander Ahuja
v. Sheha Ahuja [AIR (2020) SC 5397] opined that such order under the Act is a relevant evidence as contemplated under Sections 40 to 43 of the Evidence Act", the Court observed.
With these observations, the appeal was dismissed.
9
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1st, 2022
Crime News
Advocates and few Law Students from various law col eges have written a detailed letter to the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India on June 23rd 2021, urging him to take Suo moto cognizance apart from directing the Law Ministry to formulate a law governing cruelty against men to eradicate their helplessness and to fil in the lacuna in the law.
The same is reproduced below for you al .
10
Menʼs HUB 26
Crime News
Dated: 23.06.2021
To,
The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India.
Supreme Court of India.
New Delhi.
Subject- Request for Revisiting Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. 1860
Respected Sir,
From its very inception, the Supreme Court of India has successful y acted as the ‘sentinel on the qui vieve’ vis-a-vis fundamental rights, especial y with respect to the fundamental right of equality. It has kept pace with the developments of the society and has time and again reiterated that the Constitution is committed to an idea of substantive equality, i.e. it had to take the actual circumstances of people into account when determining what constituted ‘equal treatment’. Even so, in the current scenario, Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 fails to provide such substantive equality, depriving the person aggrieved of his legal remedy.
11
Menʼs HUB 26
Crime News
Section 498A was brought into the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in the year 1983 with the avowed object to combat the peril of cruelty to a married woman for want of dowry, which often led to their death, and to curb the menace of harassment to a woman at the hands of her husband or his relative. The object for introducing this Section is reflected in the Statement of Objects and Reasons while enacting Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act No. 46 of 1983, which clearly states ‘the increase in number of dowry deaths is a matter of serious concern’.
However, the alarming statistics of present times depict a whole new slate of affairs. Over the two decades of the 21 Century of India, women’s suicide is reduced by 2 per cent, while male’s suicide is increased by 48
per cent. Male suicides in India are much more than double that of women’s suicide, as per the ADSI 2019 report of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). This means that India loses a Son to Suicide every 5.38 Minutes or that more than 11 Sons are forced to commit suicide every hour, as against about 4 female suicides every hour. Concentrating precisely on the suicides of Married Men, the ADSI 2019 Report has shown an unprecedented increase in the Husband Suicide Index by almost 61 per cent rise in the past 20 years (21“ Century).
A woman doesn't marry you. She marries the lifestyle you are living.A woman doesn't marry you. She marries the lifestyle you are living.
12
Menʼs HUB 26
Crime News
The Indian judiciary has also taken into consideration the existence of cruelty against the married men at the behest of his wife. Few instances on the same can be witnessed in the case of Anita Gaur vs. Rajesh Gaur [First Appeal No. 115/2016], and Joydeep Majumdar vs. Bharti Jaiswal Majumdar
[Civil Appeal No. 3786/2020]. However, these cases only recognize cruelty against men in case of matrimonial disputes, it doesn’t create any deterrent effect neither does this provide an alternative resort to the Husband in case he doesn’t wish to seek divorce.
In an instant case, a tribal man was tied to a tree and beaten up with sticks by two members of the girl’s family for al egedly failing to pay them
‘deja’ (reverse dowry) for wedding, in Barwani district. Not only physical, but many men are the victim of mental cruelty also from their spouse. Such cases of cruelty among men are not uncommon in the present times.
Adding to the anguish of married men, a recent trend is noticed regarding misuse of Section 498A, by filing false and frivolous charges against the husband. The Supreme Court of India along with Hon’ble High Courts have time and again acknowledged the misuse of the Section in numerous cases, including Rajesh Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
[S.L.P No. 2013/ 2017], Anju vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi [CRL. REV.P.
730/2016], and Preeti Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand [CRL.A.1512/2010].
While referring to this situation as Legal Terrorism, the Supreme Court in 13
Menʼs HUB 26
Crime News
the case of Sushil Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India [W.P. 141/2005] made the fol owing observation:
“Just because the provision [S. 498A] is constitutional and intra vires.
it does not al ow unscrupulous people to wreck personal vendetta or unleash harassment. Thus, it may become necessary for the legislature to find ways to deal appropriately with the makers of frivolous complaints or al egations. Until then, under the current system function, the Courts have to take care of the situation.”
The Law Commission also addressed this issue concerning abuse of the provision extensively in its 243rd report on IPC and opined that the Section shal not act as an instrument of oppression and counter-harassment. The Commission laid certain guidelines to mitigate the issue, but even after 9 years, the issue stands unresolved.
The main point of concern here is the fact that Crime has no gender, and everyone should be deterred from committing it. It’s time that the laws in India recognize that Men too have mental burnout, that men too are subjected to Cruelty. The only difference here is that women have legal recourse against cruelty, but men don’t.
One of the greatest American Judges of al times- Benjamin N
Cardozo, stressed the necessity of judicial alertness to social realities. Not only this a large number of judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, such as Justice VR Krishna Iyer, Justice P.N. Bhagwati, Justice Y.V. Chandrachud 14
Menʼs HUB 26
Crime News
etc vigorously pleaded for the adoption of a sociological approach for the interpretation of the law, in the light of needs and necessities of the people of India.
Going by the principle that the law must change with the changing needs of the society and taking into account the aforementioned facts and circumstances with respect to the changing condition of men being prone to cruelty, we, the undersigned urge and implore the Supreme Court of India, to take Suo moto cognizance of the matter, and direct the Law Ministry to formulate law governing cruelty against men, in order to eradicate their helplessness and to fil in the lacuna in the law.
Looking forward to prompt action.
Yours Sincerely
Signed by: Adv. Mohit Kaushik, Muskan Malhotra, Riya Pandey, Kshitij Pandey, Swati Mishra, Athak Walia, Kriti Aeron, Saurav Narayan, Ashrita Jaiswal, Shiwangi Suman
Source :
https://www.latestlaws.com/latest-news/advocates-and-law-students
-urge-apex-court-to-direct-law-ministry-to-formulate-law-governing-cruelt y-against-men-read-letter
15
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1st, 2022
Open letter to the Hon’ble CJI
against HC order al owing charge
U/s 376 of IPC against husband
To
Hon’ble Chief Justice
Supreme Court of India
Delhi
Respected Sir
We are a registered NGO as ‘Daaman Welfare Society’, working for Men’s Rights, as part of Save Indian Family Movement, which works to reach men with a different, better vision of themselves with rights and health, and fight the hateful ideologies that affect both men and women equally! We work for the welfare of men in the domain of male suicides, misuse of gender-based laws, and also running a Men’s Helpline – 8882498498 – for men in distress! We are writing this letter against the order, dated 23.03.2022, of a single bench of Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, in Mr Hrishikesh Sahoo Vs State of Karnataka and Ors., W.P. No. 48367/2018 C/W
12976/2018, 10001/2018, 50089/2018 upholding order, dated 10.08.2018, of Special Court in Spl. C.C.No.356/2017, to frame charge under section 376 IPC against husband/accused through judicial interpretation. Although the Hon’ble High Court’s judgment addressed a number of other concerns, the objective of this letter is to focus 16
Menʼs HUB 26
Open Letter
on the element of permitting the husband/accused to be charged under section 376
IPC. And not only is the order clearly illegal in this regard, but it also violates the foundations of criminal law.
The Hon’ble HC, being a constitutional court, is supposed to uphold the existing laws in the country and not be influenced by emotions. But acting contrary, the Hon’ble Judge preferred to ignore the law of the land.
To summarise, Section 375 Exception 2 assures that sexual violence/assault between
spouses
is
not
considered
rape.
For
a
variety
of
reasons,
lawmakers/legislators made the conscious decision to maintain Exception 2. We remain steadfast in our belief that Exception 2 does not grant a partner (only a husband, as our law does not even accept that wife too can sexually assault a husband) the right to sexually attack his wife. Any order or judgment by any court at this time enabling a husband to be prosecuted under IPC 376 is essentially trespassing into the exclusive realm of legislative.
No court should get into the shoes of the legislature and create a new offence even Indirectly, and this is what precisely Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka did through its order – created a new offence against the husband. The order in question is in dear violation of Article 20(1) of the constitution of India apart from being against Article 14 & 21 which guarantee equal protection by law and right to life, liberty & dignity respectively. Further, it is also not the case that an aggrieved wife is remediless, in fact, she has been provided with a complete framework of laws to prosecute husband against sexual violence/assault.
The more one reads the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka’s ruling, the more it reveals passion rather than a path to justice. Despite, there being no dearth of legal minds during the hearing of the case to help the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka for example Smt. Namitha Mahesh learned Additional Government Advocate representing respondent No.1-State, Sri. Shanthi Bhushan learned Assistant Solicitor General of India representing the Central Government, and Sr. Counsel of wife/respondent to the case, it is unfortunate that no one except Sr. Counsel of petitioner/husband argued against framing of charge against husband/accused under section IPC 376 which is blatant ignorance of the law of the land. It is not even necessary to discuss the merits of judicial interpretation because no statute empowers the Hon’ble High Court to invent 18
17
Menʼs HUB 26
Open Letter
new offences. It is entrusted with the task of dismissing any order or judgement that is contrary to the law of the land.
Prayer
It is therefore humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India take Suo Moto cognizance of the patently illegal order, dated 23/03/2022, passed by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in relation to the framing of charge U/s 376 IPC against the husband/accused and set it aside to prevent the judiciary to enter into the boundaries of the legislative domain in the best interest of justice to every citizen of this country.
18
18
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1, 2022
I FEAR
A Men
Watching Discovery Channel, where a lion is trying to kill a deer. Probably kill is not the right word, lion is just trying to get food for own survival. Deer are part of the food chain for lions, it's natural. I don’t have any problem with that, but when I see in the eyes of dear, what I see is fear. Again its natural, fear is natural for deer when facing lions. Lions are also not free from fear. Fear is one of the emotions or reactions given by Nature or God. It applies to humans more precisely Men also.
Today when I start thinking about a man, what he sees and what he faces in every moment of his life, what I remember is a small incident from my childhood. Although the incident is of little importance, so little that most people involved in the incident may not remember, even though I can't recall every part of the incident, still I would like to share whatever I remember.
It was winter afternoon, I was back from school, suddenly ladies from a nearby house came out shouting that someone jumped on the roof of their house. These ladies fear it is a ghost.
Anyway it was office hours and no men were at home, so a couple of men were called from nearby shops and they searched the entire house. As expected no-one was there. That evening these ladies stayed in our house, till people came back from work. Late at night again there was some problem in that house, most ladies were out and most men from the house were searching 19
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
their own house as well as nearby houses. Next morning a couple of people were talking about the incident and a few reported the existence of a man in their house in white dress, A GHOST.
Now the incident has little importance, it does not matter if ghosts exist or not, it does not matter if a reported ghost in white dress was really witnessed or not, it does not matter if such incident is reported again or not, but what really matters is who searched the house, who investigated the matter. Both the time when a ghost was reported by neighbor ladies, MEN was called. All ladies were just waiting outside till the line was cleared by MEN.
These ladies didn’t enter the house because they fear from the unknown, at the same time expecting men to enter and remove the reason behind fear. The similar situation most of us have witnessed in our own life, most times men come forward to remove the cause of fear.
Does that mean men are fearless ?
I consider the situation very differently, men are fearful just like any other living being on earth. Sometimes he hides his fear because he has no option, but most of the time he hides his fear to impress someone.
Society or specifically members of our society can’t protect themselves. They need someone to protect them, and as a protector they find a fearless man. Society is not ready to accept the fact that men also fear from something, society needs fearless men who can fight and die to protect them. Unfortunately men also follow the same path blindly, he just denies the existence of fear to prove his manhood. Most of the time men don’t accept the fact that they FEAR just because they are Men. But I can’t ignore the fact that I FEAR it doesn't matter if I hide it, it doesn't matter if I deny it, somewhere deep inside we all fear something, and society needs to understand and accept it one day. We can’t live just to protect, we have a beautiful life waiting for us.
20
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1st, 2022
NCRB – Suicides: India Lost 97613
sons in 2019
Anupam Dubey
Over 2 decades of 21st Century of India, Women Suicide reduce by 3%, Population increase by 28%, Male Suicide increase by 48%, Male Suicide Index (MSI) ups by 8.3% & Husband Suicide Index (HSI) by 10%
Daaman Welfare Society & Trust strongly request the government to
set up “National Commission for Men” at the earliest
Daaman Welfare Society & Trust, registered NGOs under the aegis of Save Indian Family (SIF) movement, strongly request the government to set up a ‘National Commission for Men’ given the alarming suicide rates amongst men in the country.
Male suicides in India were at 97613, much more than double that of women’s suicides at 41493, as per ADSI 2019 report of National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB).
Below, we have plotted the graph of Suicides data as per NCRB, since 1967: 21
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
Male Suicide Vs Female Suicide – 2019
This data shows us the mirror of the #Misandry filled Country that we have made it, under Feminist pressure:
● Male Suicide Index (MSI) i.e. the ratio of Male Suicide to Female Suicides in India:
● Since 1967, has increased from 1.4 by almost additional 1.0 and currently stands at 2.35. It means that for every 100 females committing suicide in India, 235
males are committing suicide
● Past 20 years (21st Century), it is much more astonishing as MSI has increased by almost 52% i.e. from 1.55 in 2000 to 2.35 in 2019 while the Population growth 21-28
22
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
over the same period is just about 28%
● India lost 97613 sons to Suicides Last Year, an increase of 6% from the data of 2018.This, as compared to a decrease of 2.2% in Suicides of Women, brings in a total increase of almost 8.3% in the MSI. This is within a population increase of just 1%
● MSI increased from 2.17 in 2018 to 2.35 in 2019, marking it as the 2nd Steepest Year-On-Year jump in MSI since 1967 (First being in 2012 at 8.7%).
● This means that India loses a Son to Suicide every 5.38 Minutes or that more than 11 Sons are forced to commit Suicide every Hour, as against about 4 female suicides every hour. This means that by the time this Press Release is read & comprehended in about 5 minutes 23 seconds, 1 male would have committed suicide in India
It is really very ironical that in our country, where Feminists keep words like Patriarchy, Women Empowerment evergreen; where Politicians keep going overboard to please the women vote bank; where Law is Biased; Gender Based Courts, Gender based Police exist AND where the Society is highly Women Centric, Men find them always forced more to suicides by huge percentage.
Further, ADSI 2019, while giving the data on suicides of Married Men (Husbands) and Married Women (Wife) has shown unprecedented increase in Husband Suicides too:
21-28
23
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
Husband Suicide Index – 2019
This data shows us the mirror of the state of pressure on Husbands and a clear push-on killing the Family system by making Marriage as a Suicidal zone for men, because of
#GenderBiasedLaws and ignoring the Men at large:
● Husband Suicide Index (HSI) i.e. the ratio of Married Male Suicide to Married Female Suicides in India:
21-28
24
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
● Since 1995, has increased from 1.43 by almost additional 1.15 and currently stands at 2.58. It means that for every 100 wives committing suicide in India, 258
Husbands are committing suicide
● Past 20 years (21st Century), it is much more astonishing as HSI has increased by almost 61% i.e. from 1.6 in 2000 to 2.58 in 2019 while the Population growth over the same period is just about 28%
● India lost 66815 Married Men to Suicides Last Year, an increase of 3.1% from the data of 2018. This, as compared to a decrease of 6.5% in Suicides of Married Women, brings in a total increase of whooping 10.3% in the HSI. This is within a population increase of just 1%
● HSI increased from 2.34 in 2018 to 2.58 in 2019, marking it as the Steepest Ever Year-On-Year jump in HSI since 1995.
● This means that India loses a Married Men to Suicide every 7.86 Minutes or that more than 7.6 Husbands are forced to commit Suicide every Hour, as against about 2.96 wives suicides every hour. This means that by the time this Press Release is read, comprehended & shared in about 7 minutes 52 seconds, 1
Husband would have committed suicide in India Few more important pointers from the data of ADSI 2019, it is amply clear that: 1. Family Problems is the biggest reason for suicide (unlike to more highlighted reasons for Farmers/Financial issues). Family Problem accounts for 32.4% of the Total Suicides in India. It is important to note that till 1995, the reason for “Family 21-28
25
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
Problem” was not even existing. Before 1995, the reason was “Quarrel with In-Laws, Spouse”. In a habit of miniaturizing the problems of Men, Feminist pressures clubbed those into Family Problems to just make it sound like a vague reason. To put in the right perspective, “Quarrel with In-Laws, Spouse” is the reason for 32.4% suicides in 2019.
2. Marriage is Dangerous for Men and Better for Women: Amongst Married People, Husbands were 72+% while Male in unmarried category formed 66.4+% of the total suicide. So, Marriage increases the risk of suicide on Men by about 6%.
While Marriage makes it 6% safer and better for Women.
3. Marriage being dangerous for Men and safer for women is further established by the fact that even in case of Divorced + Separated category on Suicides, Male was found to be about 8% lesser than in case of being Married. Whereas, in the case of Female, there is an increase of 8% in their ratio of total suicides once Divorce/Separated as against their married population.
Total Suicides
In the farming sector, amongst 10281 suicides, 90+% were Men.
21-28
26
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
Suicides by men surpass that of women by a wide margin regardless of social status –
whether unmarried, married, widowed/widower, divorcee and separated. Looking at NCRB data of the last 11 years only, it is highly shameful that close to 10 lakh (1 million) Indian Men have committed suicide and the government is sitting silently without caring about men of this country. The government has only been focussed on making women-centric laws and spending thousands of crores of rupees each year on various 21-28
27
Menʼs HUB 26
Article
gender biased schemes and programs both at the central and state levels. It is really sad that even during the Corona, where Men are 70% of the total deaths, Feminist organizations like WHO have been spreading the falsehood of Domestic Violence on Women while the reality is that Men are bigger victims of Domestic Violence. DV on men has increased because of CoVID19. without caring about men of this country. The government has only been focussed on making women centric laws and spending thousands of crores of rupees each year on various gender biased schemes and programs both at the central and state levels. It is really sad that even during the Corona, where Men are 70% of the total deaths, Feminist organizations like WHO have been spreading the falsehood of Domestic Violence on Women while the reality is that Men are bigger victims of Domestic Violence. DV on men has increased because of CoVID19.
Indian Male Suicide has been increasing regularly. In the last 20 years, Male Suicide Index (MSI), has increased from 1.55 to 2.35. This is very alarming. Men are under a lot of stress, unable to cope up with the demands of modern-day society. Lack of empathy of society and government towards men is an area of serious concern.
It is high time that the government acknowledges that men in this country have been suffering due to lack of empathy towards men as victims in the society and rampant misuse of women-centric laws. We strongly urge the government to take steps towards addressing issues of men by forming a ‘National Commission for Men’ and abolishing all gender-biased laws.
21-28
28
MEN’S HUB
Oct 1st, 2022
रावण संवाद
अभय भ ं ट
।।रावण संवाद सफ वन हे पलाइन पर ।।
जी हा म रावण ! ी राम से बैर लेने वाला वह रावण,
ी राम के पु षाथ के दशन का सौभा य पाने वाला रावण,
ुपनखा के रचे छल म घर जाने वाला रावण,
दैवी सीता के अपहरण का दु साहस करने वाला रावण, कदा चत अपने क त और यश म चूर रावण,
कायरता नह ं अ पतु साहस दशन करने वाला रावण,
इस युग म नह ं अ पतु उस युग म ज म लेने वाला रावण, अपने वंश को मो ा त कराने वाला वह रावण।।
जी हा म रावण ! आज के आधु नक युग के पु ष क दुदशा देख चं तत हूं, पु ष को पा रवा रक दायतीव म पसता देख आ चयच कत हूं, पु ष को पा रवा रक सुख एवं अपन व से वं चत देख दुखी हूं, पल म वावलंबी और पल म अबला बनती नार के पाखंड व प देख लि जत हूं, 29
Menʼs HUB 26
क वता
आधु नक युग के सैकड़ ुपनखा के माया जाल एवं छल क रचना का सा ी हूं, जेल बेल एवं झूठे मुकदम म पु ष को घरता देख अचं भत हूं, ढ़ता को दर कनारे कर पु ष के बल बलाते रवैया देख ो धत हूं, ल मण का पु षाथ याग कर पु ष के आ मदाह करने पर हताश हूं।।
जी हा म रावण ! पु ष को प र म नह ं अ पतु आल य म घरा देख च कत हूं, कंुभकरण जैसे आ ाकार भाई से वं चत पुरष का मनोबल गरता देख क ट द हूं,
ुपनखा के छल म घरकर पु ष को पु ष से लड़ता देख आ चयच कत हूं, पु ष वारा सैकड़ ुपनखा को ो साहन देता देख आहत हूं, सैकड़ ुपनखा को कानूनी एवं सामािजक सं षण देता देख ो धत हूं, पु ष के अ धकार के लए कोई आयोग ना होता देख हताश हूं।
जी हा म रावण ! कहा जाऊ कसे बताऊ अपनी यह पीड़ा, नराश क तु परािजत नह ं, आहत क तु प त नह ं हूं, पु षो के अ धकार क हुंकार सुनकर आ व त हूं,
सेव इं डया फै मल मूवमट के रचना देख उ सा हत हूं, भारत के जाने माने पाक म पु ष का संगठन देख नि चंत हूं, येक स ताह वीकल मी टंग देख मु ध हूं,
पु ष को सह राह सह सलाह सुन शंसा चत हूं,
पु ष के साहस बढ़ता, िजवन म ढ़ता देख ग वत हूं
और अपनी नद षता माण करने का संक प देख संतु ट हूं।।
जी हा म रावण ! नसंकोज ये कथन है मेर , है पु षो म! तु हारे लए अब ना और राम आएंगे, तु हारा यु ध तु हे वयं ढ़ता से
लड़ना होगा,
