NOTINGS ROSCOE POUND: The teacher of law should be a student of Sociology, Economics and Political Science as well. He should know not only what the courts decide and the legal principles by which Rajesh Sharma vs. State of U.P. Whether any directions are called for to prevent the misuse of Section 498-A, as acknowledged in certain studies and decisions? Need to check the tendency to rope in all family members to settle a matrimonial dispute. Omnibus allegations against all relatives of the husband can t be taken at face value when in normal course it may only be the husband or at best his parents who may be accused of demanding dowry or causing cruelty. To check the abuse of over implications, clear supporting material is needed to proceed against other relatives of a husband. There is growing tendency to abuse the said provision to rope in all the relatives including parents of advanced age, minor children, siblings, grand-parents and uncles on the strength of vague and exaggerated allegations without there being any verified evidence of physical or mental harm or injury. This may hamper any possible reconciliation and reunion of a couple. Statistics from: Crime Records Bureau (CRB) Report of Crime in India 2005 2009 2012 2013 Cases 58319 89546 466079 Arrest 127560 174395 197762 Fake 6141 8352 Women 47951 Charge Sheet 93.6% Conviction 14.4% 15.6% (7258) Pending 372706 Projected 317000 38165 Acquittal Withdrawn 8218 Death 24,771 between 2012 2014 (>760 deaths in 2015) Conclusion: Complaint filed on heat of the moment over trivial issues. Most of cases not bonafide. Implications and consequences not visualized. Lead to uncalled for harassment for both parties. Arrests ruin the chances of settlement.
Sushil Kumar Sharma vs. UoI [(2005) 6 SCC 281] Preeti Gupta vs. State of Jharkhand [(2010) 7 SCC 667] Ram Gopal vs. State of M.P. [(2010) 13 SCC 540] Savitri Devi vs. Ramesh Chandra Above judgments judicially acknowledged the misuse of the provision. Madras High Court guidelines: Check and curb the menace of dowry and at the same time, save the matrimonial homes from destruction. Such harassment is made simply to satisfy the ego and anger of the complainant. If the Magistrate themselves accede to the bare requests of the police without examining the actual state of affairs, it would create negative effects. The husband and his family members may have difference of opinion in the dispute, for which, arrest and judicial remand are not the answers. The ultimate object of every legal system is to punish the guilty and protect the innocents. Delhi High Courtguidelines: No case without the prior approval of DCP/Addl. DCP. Arrest after thorough investigation with prior approval. Arrest of the collateral accused after the prior approval. Police should depute trained staff. FIR not registered in a routine manner. Police scrutinize complaints. FIR registered only against whom there are strong allegations. If no possibility of settlement then necessary steps return of stridhan and dowry articles etc. Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar: Police officers not automatically arrest, if necessary follow the Section 41 of Cr.P.C. (When police arrest without warrant) Check list under Section 41(1)(b)(ii). Police file check list with reasons and material for arrest before the Magistrate. Magistrate after recording its satisfaction, authorize detention. Decision not to arrest with recorded reason, forward within two weeks to Magistrate which extended by Superintendent of Police. Notice with reason for appearance to accused in terms of Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. within two weeks, extended by Superintendent of Police.
Police officer liable for departmental action and contempt of court if not comply the directions. Magistrate liable to departmental action if authorize detention without record the reason. LalitKumari vs. Government of U.P.: Arrest of relative only after permission of Magistrate. No arrest above 70 years of age. Power of police to straight away arrest prohibited. Court ascertains prima facie material before arrest. Offence should make compoundable and bailable. Role of each accused must specify in complaint with signed affidavit. Copy of preliminary enquiry furnished to the accused. Other Suggestions: Arrest only after recording reason and express approval from Superintendent of Police. Relatives outside India, proceeds when I.O. convinced that is necessary, in which impounding of passport and red corner notice should be avoided. Before registration of case procedure of counseling should be mandatory under Section 14 of DV Act, 2005. 243 rd Law Commission Report (August, 2012): recommend making the offence compoundable. 140 th Report of the RajyaSabha Committee (September, 2011) The Malimath Committee Section 498-A: Object of punishing cruelty at the hands of husband or his relatives, if the cruelty has potential to result in suicide or murder Statement of Objects & Reasons of Act 46 of 1983. Covers suicide or grave injury (mental or physical) or danger to life or harassment for unlawful demand. Required remedial steps: Implications and arrest for husband side. Continuation of proceedings despite settlement since it is noncompoundable. No doubt in doing so laying down of norms is sometimes unavoidable. Just and fair procedure being part of fundamental right to life. The court has incidental power to quash even a non-compoundable case of private nature, if continuing the proceedings is found to be oppressive. At the same time, violation of human rights of innocent can t be brushed aside. Certain safeguards against uncalled for arrest or insensitive investigation has to be address by this court.
Following Directions: Involvement of civil society in the aid of administration of justice can be one of the steps. Every District Court One or more Family Welfare Committee Constituted by DLSA Comprising of 3 members. Committee s work reviewed Once in year By District & Sessions Judge. Constituted of.(specifically not mentioned any woman member). Members will not a witness Basic minimum training Honorarium. Every complaint received by Police or Magistrate referred to Committee. Members interact with parties personally or communication means. Report with factual aspects and opinion who referred the complaint within one month till then no arrest. Report then considered by I.O. or Magistrate. Investigation by designated I.O. (Appoint within one month with training) If settlement Dispose of proceedings including criminal cases. Bail application with one clear day s notice to P.P./complainant Recovery of disputed dowry items not be a ground for denial of bail if maintenance or other rights are protected Individual roles, prima facie truth of allegations, further custody and interest of justice must be weighed. Persons outside of India Passport or Red Corner Notice not be issued in routine Appearance ought to be exempted through V.C. Club all cases of parties to take holistic view by the Court. These directions not applicable on offences involving tangible physical injuries and death. NLSA after 6 months give report for any change or further directions..
INDEX Sl. No. Particulars Page Number Remarks Part I (Contents of paper book) Part II (Contents of file alone) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) * Court Fees NIL 1. Office Report on Limitation 2. Listing Performa A1-A2 A1-A2 3. Cover Page of Paper Book A-3 4. Index of Record of Proceedings A-4 5. Limitation Report prepared by A-5 Registry 6. Defect List A-6 7. Note Sheet NS 1 to 8. Synopsis & List of Dates B - C 9. Writ Petition with Affidavit 1-9 10. Appendix A 10-11 Article 15 & 32 of the Constitution of India 11. Annexure P-1 12 12A Copy of Registration Certificate of the Petitioner dated 3-07-2007 with Original 12. Annexure P-2 13 13A Copy of Objectives of the Petitioner Organization 13. Annexure P-3 14 33 Copy of the Judgment dated 27-07-2017 in Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 (Rajesh Sharma vs. State of U.P.) 14. Letter 33A 14. Filing Memo 34 15. Vakalatnama 35 16. Authority Letter 36
SECTION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL/CRIMINAL/ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL)...OF 2017 IN THE MATTER OF: NYAYADHAR VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS INDEX SRL. NO. PARTICULARS COPIES COURT FEE 1. Writ Petition with Affidavit 1+3 NIL 2. ANNEXURE P-1 to P-3 1+3 NIL 3. VAKALATNAMA 1 TOTAL RS. CERTIFIED THAT THE COPIES ARE CORRECT FILED ON: 22-09-2017 FILED BY: (MANJU SHARMA JETLEY) ADVOCATE - ON - RECORD ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER C. C. NO. 350 MOB: +91-9990524307
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CRIMINAL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION) UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO /2017 IN THE MATTER OF:- Nyayadhar Union of India &Ors. Versus Respondents Petitioner PAPER BOOK (FOR INDEX KINDLY SEE INSIDE) ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER: (MANJU SHARMA JETLEY)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CRIMINAL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO /2017 IN THE MATTER OF:- Nyayadhar Union of India &Ors. Versus Respondents Petitioner OFFICE REPORT ON LIMITATION 1. The petition is within time. 2. The petition is barred by time and there is delay of days in filing the same against order dated and petition for condonation of.. days delay has been filed. 3. There is delay of.. days in refilling the petitioner and petition for condonation of.. days in refilling has been filed. Place:New Delhi Dated: 22-09-2017 BRANCH OFFICER
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (CRIMINAL ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO /2017 IN THE MATTER OF:- Nyayadhar Union of India &Ors. Versus Respondents CERTIFICATE Petitioner This is to certify that the Writ Petition is confined only to the pleadings which are necessary and other documents relied upon in these proceedings. It is further certified that the copies of annexure attached to this Writ Petition are necessary to answer the questions of law raised in the petition and to make out grounds urged in the Writ Petition for consideration of this Hon ble Court. This certificate is given on the basis of the instructions given by the petitioner / or person whose affidavit is filed in support of Writ Petition. Drawn by: Alok Singh Advocate Drawn on: 10-09-2017 Filed on: 22-09-2017 Filed By: (Manju Sharma Jetley) Advocate for the Petitioner C.C. No. 350
To, The Registrar, Supreme Court of India New Delhi- 01 MANJU SHARMA JETLEY Advocate-On-Record Date: 15-09-2017 ATHOURITY LETTER Sub: WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO. /2017 [Nyayadhar VS.Union of India &Ors.] Sir, In the above matter, I authorised to Mr. Alok Singh &Ajai Kumar, Advocates on my behalf to file / re-file, remove the defects, collect the file and ancillary acts for the purpose of registration of this case in the Registry of the Supreme Court of India. Alok Singh &Ajai Kumar (Advocates) D/2048/2008 & UP/06038/08 Mobile: +91-9990524307 Yours Faithfully (Manju Sharma Jetley) Advocate-On-Record C.C. No. 350
SYNOPSIS & LIST OF DATES The petitioner is seeking permission to file this writ petition before this Hon ble Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner in the form of writ of mandamus wants to seek directions/orders from this Hon ble Courtto implement the suggestions as praying by the petitioner in matrimonial disputes under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. It is pertinent to mention herein that this Hon ble Court has given some directions/guidelines in Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 (Rajesh Kumar vs. State of U.P.) to follow by the concerned authoritiesin cases related with Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. Nyayadhar, the petitioner is organization formed by ladies advocate of District Ahmednagar, Maharashtra. It is established in 2003 with motive to help the ladies who are suffering harassment in their family. This organization provides free legal help to ladies and children in courts throughout Maharashtra in general and specifically in District Ahmednagar. This organization has a government approval for rendering services with respect to family advice counseling and medical aid etc. Deep study of the petitioner to overcome the problems related to the cases like family violence and dowry cases even follow up by women commission. It is pointed out that a married woman whenever go to the police station to make a complaint against her husband and other close relations takes a risk to fight with society at large but being left with no other remedy against cruelty and harassment ultimately choose this last resort i.e. Section 498A of IPC. So, mindless and senseless deprivation of life and liberty of women could not have been dealt with effectively through soft sanctions alone. Though values of equality and non-discrimination may have to gain deeper roots through other social measures, the need to give valuable protection to vulnerable sections of women cannot be negated. The petitioner need not to say that husband s relative and husband have fear of Section 498-A of IPC and 70-80% matter solved because of this fear alone at the initial stage, but the primary questionstill survives i.e. what about a woman who has beaten and harassed so badly that she is near to death but not dead. That time a woman really needs 498-A for her safety.
That Section 498-A of IPC is most helpful instrument in the hands of victim women to get immediate relief from law and police station, but guidelines issued that no immediate arrest to accused person and his family. As the result, the fear of law is totally vanished from the minds of accused and his family. Resultantly we may say that the soul of Section 498-A is dead and now Sec. 498-A is become valueless. There is no immediate relief to victim women from cruelty and harassment. Ultimately she left alone to handling herself and her children s life with own risk. Thus a question arise before the Indian Judicial System, how totackle and protect the constitutional rights of women s? Hence this Writ Petition. LIST OF DATES 03-07-2007: The petitioner was registered as Public Charitable Trust on 03-07-2007. The true typed copy of the Registration Certificate dated 03-07-2007 is annexed herewith as Annexure P- 1. (Page ).. The objectives and aim of the petitioner organization. The true copy of the objectives is annexed herewith as Annexure P- 2. (Page ) 27-07-2017: The copy of judgment dated 27-07-2017 in Civil Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 (Rajesh Sharma vs. State of U.P.).The true typed copy of the judgment dated 27-07-2017 is annexed herewith as Annexure P- 3. (Page ) 23-09-2017: Hence this Writ Petition.
In Re: Nyayadhar IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (ORIGINAL CRIMINAL WRIT JURISDICTION) WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. OF 2017 (Lady Lawyer Organization) 3 rd Floor, RajhansVihar, In front of District Court, Ahmednagar (Maharashtra) 414001 1. Union of India Through: The Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs, VERSUS North Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi 110001 2. Ministry of Women & Child Development Through: The Secretary ShastriBhawan, New Delhi 110001 3. National Commission for Women Through: The Chairman Plot No. 21, Jasola Institutional Area, New Delhi 110025 4. National Legal Services Authority To, 12/11, Jam Nagar House, Shahjahan Road New Delhi- 01 Petitioner Respondents PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS FOR DIRECTIONS/ORDERS TO IMPLIMENTTHESUGGESTIONSOF THE PETITIONER IN DISPUTES RELATED WITH SECTION 498-A OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE Hon'bleThe Chief Justice And His Lordship s Companion Justices of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India The humble petition of the petitioner above named:
Most respectfully showeth: 1. That the petitioner herein invokes your Lordships Jurisdiction under Section 32 of the Constitution of India for seeking direction/s to implementation of the suggestions according to the need of the time. The petitioner submits that the present case is a fit case to call for Your Lordship s considerationto enhance the sharpness of the directions/guidelines given in cases related with Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. 1A. That the petitioner never approached the respondents or any authority relating with issues involved in this Writ Petition. 2. The petitioner organization established in 2003 by lady advocatesin District Ahmednagar (Maharashtra). The ground to form this organization is that only a woman can better understand, represent, and solve the problem of another woman.the petitioner main motive is to help the ladies who are downtrodden and suffering from injustice from their respective families. Moreover, to help the women to understand the laws related to family issues. The petitioner done deep research to settle down the disputes related within four walls of the family.from 2003 to 2010 the petitioner registers 479 complaints especially from ladies all around the state of Maharashtra and from 2010 to 2017 received around 1658 complaint related to women for counseling. The petitioner has a government approval for rendering services with respect to family advice counseling and medical aid etc. The deep study of the petitioner to overcome the problems related to the cases like family violence and dowry cases were follow up by women commission. The research result will be demonstrated in the following paras. The true typed copy of the Registration Certificate and Objectives of the petitioner is annexed herewith as Annexure P-1(Page 12-12A) & P-2 (Page 13-13A) respectively. 3. Brief Glimpse on the Issue: I. That Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code, since its introduction has increasingly been vilified and associated with the perception that it is misused that women frequently use it as a weapon against their inlaws. This counter-narrative is particularly ubiquitous on the internet, in the many online communities of husbands who feel wronged by vengeful wives.
II. III. IV. That there is general complaint that Section 498-A of the IPC is subject to gross misuse; but provides no data to indicate how frequently the section is being misused. It is important therefore that such arguments are responded to, so as to put forth a clearer picture of the present factual status of the effect of several criminal laws enacted to protect the women. That domestic violence and abuse by spouses and family members are complex behaviors and the social organization of courts, the police and legal cultures systematically tend to devalue domestic violence cases. That Section 498-A was introduced in the Indian Penal Code in 1983 and the reforms of the past 34 years have not been adequately evaluated at all by the governments with respect to their deterrence goals, despite the institutionalization of law and policy to criminalize domestic violence. V. That it is important to do these studies to correct the general misconceptions that woman are misusing the law by filing false cases against their husband and in-laws in order to harass them and get them convicted. This perspective of the State and its agencies needs to change from that of protecting the husbands and in-laws against potential misuse of the laws of domestic violence to that of implementing their real purpose to recognize that such violence is a crime and protect women who have the courage to file complaints against their abusers. VI. That Article 15 of the Constitution of India reinforces the fact that a woman is not a toy to be played with, to be thrown away at one s whims and fancies and treated as inferior to any other. It inherently asks for husbands to their wives well and not misbehave or demand unjustly which in a way sends forth a message that woman is a commodity for sale. VII. There are some following points and data analysis from the petitioner to consider from this Hon ble Court: i) When harassment start after the marriage.
ii) Classification according to income of the family. When harassment start after the marriage The surveys conducted by the petitioner show that harassment start from the initial days of marriage and when it not stops, the woman come for counseling to stop and reduce her harassment. Number of Days Percentage of Cases of Harassment 3days to 1month 23% 1month to 6 months 30% 6 months to 1 year 19% 1year to 2 years 28% Classification according to husband family income Husband s family income permonth. Percentage of Cases Below Rs. 20,000/- 55% Rs. 20,000/- to 50,000/- 35% Rs. 50,000/- and above 10% It is worth mentioning the statics which was considered by this Hon ble Court in Civil Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 (Rajesh Sharma &Ors. Vs. State of U.P. &Ors.) Crime Records Bureau (CRB) Report of Crime in India 2005 2009 2012 2013 Cases 58319 89546 466079 Arrest 127560 174395 197762 Fake 6141 8352 Women 47951 Charge Sheet 93.6% Conviction 14.4% 15.6% (7258) Pending 372706 Projected 317000 38165 Acquittal Withdrawn 8218 Death 24,771 between 2012 2014 (>760 deaths in 2015)
The petitioner observed that a balanced and holistic approach is needed to curve this menace of cruelty. The point to be noted herein that thishon ble Court has not considered the number of deaths of woman which is an eye opening illustration of this abuse of cruelty against the women. So, the values to be attached to the rights of womenare no less than the value to be attached to the family as a unit and vice-versa. The challenge before the community is to ensure the promotion of both values. The true typed copy of Criminal Appeal No. 1265 of 2017 is annexed herewith as Annexure P-3 (Page ) 5. That the petitioner has never file any Writ Petition before this Hon ble Court or any other court. 6. Grounds: A. Because it is a social institution where husband has the responsibility to take care and maintain his wife. She wants to feel safeguarding in the house but situation was against expectation when woman get cruelty and faces harassment behind the four walls of their matrimonial home. B. Because large victims are from poor and illiterate background, living in rural areas,mostly benefited from section 498-A of Indian Penal Code. C. Because sometimes, dowry may not be the cause but the woman for several reasons like her complexion or family status is tortured to death. D. Because in many cases the court has not considered mental cruelty caused to the woman but has concentrated only on any sign of physical cruelty. If evidence does not show that the woman was physically harassed, then the court does not look into the case. What the court does is call the woman hyper-sensitive or of low tolerance level and having an unstable mind. E. Because when woman to go to the police station to make a complaint for physical assault against her husband and other close relatives that time police send her to Civil Hospital or Rural Health Center because she had a injuries on her body which required treatment. For going to hospital police station give letter
to woman for medical checkup but police station not maintain register for this type of letters.when woman gives that letter to hospital they took that letter and make registry to MLC register. Because of injuries and constant pain women took treatment, medicine and go home for rest and recover health. In this all procedure police station not maintain register for letters which given to women and in hospital MLC register they not differently mention women cruelty cases and it shows only record in register. More so the police station didn t file NC (Non-cognizable offence) because the woman didn t go back to the police station after getting treatment from hospital. F. Because in general the woman has no knowledge about going back to police station and register NC. Because of not registering NC no one make attention towards her complain and NC register make no use because of no complain file. That s why women being left with no other option, so she feels helpless and once again she goes husband s home then husband and his relatives increase confidence police and judicial system make no harm to them so they are more violent. G. Because a women who having gone to the Police Station with a genuine grievance go back to marital home with compromise women s liberty and dignity in a state of distress she inspires to subside. Even unable to stay with relatives because according to Indian culture once women married she dies there but not come parental home and another reason is many times his father brother was not afford she stay with them. H. Because the courts have in several instances made a very narrow interpretation of this section considering it to be only cruelty in relation to unlawful demands or dowry demands. I. Because it is also clearly noticed that woman today are still tortured and often the court being the ultimate savior also does not come to the rescue to protect these woman. J. Because as per allegations the abuse of this section is mostly used by well-educated women who know that this section is
both cognizable and non-bailable and impromptu works on the complaint of the woman and placing the man behind the bars. But who will take-care the poor and illiterate women in society from this disease of cruelty? K. Because, no doubt many times take due advantage of the fact that they are referred to as the weaker sex and on the foundation of rights ensured to them are violating other s rights, butthe position of the woman in India is still bad and they still need rights to alleviate themselves in society. 6. P R A Y E R It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleasedto: A. Issue a writ for direction to the respondents thereby to implement the suggestion i.e. out of 3 members at least 2 ladies members should be appoint in the Family Welfare Committee; B. Issue a writ for direction to the respondents thereby to implement the suggestion i.e. one member who has done M.S.W. (Master in Social Work) should be appoint in the Family Welfare Committee; C. Issue a writ for direction to the respondents thereby to implement the suggestion i.e. at the time of counseling and recording of the facts, the Family Welfare Committee should mention and considered the economic status of the parties; D. pass any such other order(s) as deemed fit and proper to secure the ends of justice. DRAWN BY:FILED BY: ALOK SINGH Drawn on: 10-09-2017 Filed on: 22-09-2017(MANJU SHARMA JETLEY) Advocate for the Petitioner C.C. NO. 350
PROFORMA FOR FIRST LISTING The case pertains to (Please tick/check the correct box): Central Act : (Title): The Constitution of India SECTION: X Section: Article 32 Central Rule: (Title): Rule No (s): State Act: (Title) N/A Section: N/A State Rule: (Title) N/A Rule No (s): N/A Impugned Interim Order: (Dated) N/A Impugned Final Order/Decree : (Dated): (Name) High Court: Names of Judges: Tribunal/Authority: (Name):. 1. Nature of matter: Criminal 2. (a) Petitioner/Appellant: Nyayadhar (b) E-Mail ID: N/A (c) Mobile phone number: N/A 3. (a) Respondent No.1: Union of India. (b) E-Mail ID: N/A (c) Mobile Phone Number: N/A 4. (a) Main category classification: 14 (b) Sub classification: 1418 5. Note to be listed before: N/A 6. Similar/Pending matter: No similar matter pending. 7. Criminal Matters: N/A (a) Whether accused/convict has surrendered: Yes No (b) FIR No. N/A Date N/A (c) Police Station: N/A (d) Sentenced Awarded: N/A
(e) Sentenced Under gone: N/A 8. Land Acquisition Matters: N/A (a) Date of Section 4 notification: N/A (b) Date of Section 6 notification: N/A (c) Date of Section 17 notification: N/A 9. Tax Matters: State the tax effect: N/A 10. Special Category (first Petitioner/Appellant only): N/A Senior citizen 65 years SC/ST Woman/child Disabled Legal Aid case in custody 11. Vehicle Number (in case of Motor Accident Claim matters): N/A 12. Decided cases with citation: N/A Date: 22.09.2017 (Manju Sharma) AOR for the Petitioner Registration No.350
Appendix -A The Constitution of India: Article 15 15. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth (1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex,place of birth or any of them. (2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to (a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or (b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public. (3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children. (4) Nothing in this article or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. (5) Nothing in this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 shall prevent the State from making any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30. The Constitution Of India: Article 32 32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part (1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed; (2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition,
quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part; (3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clause ( 1 ) and ( 2 ), Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause ( 2 ); (4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by this Constitution // TRUE TYPED COPY//