rkumar said:
Tavathia Sahab,
If you read her post, she starts with a sub-heading of FACTS. One cannot call something facts unless one has been either the party involved or the one on the scene. There have been few posts on the subjects and there has been no meaningful general discussion, except making allegations. Most of the people, who initiated the post and used bad language, never show up again. I am always for meaningful debates on any subject. Let there be a debate on following points;
1. Does mere allegations and filing of a case against someone make him/ her culprit?
2. Should one be allowed to hold a public office if someone has filed a court case against him/ her?
3. Should one be allowed to travel abroad if there is a divorce case filed against him/ her?
4. Should one be issued a passport if there is a court cases pending against him/ her?
5. Should someone not be given a bail in dowry case and then not allowed to travel to attend his/ her work abroad?
I am very keen that members contribute to debate on all these above points.
Regards
Rajendra
1. Everybody is innocent unless proved otherwise in a court of law.
2. No. Otherwise nobody would be able to hold any office. After every election half of the population of India would be found qued up in courts filing court cases against each other on flimsy grounds. : "Issne muje maa bahan ki gaali dee" is also a valid ground to file a case. Hence, 100% jats would become ineligible to hold office.
3. Not at all. Almost half of our film stars, businessmen, sports stars whom we worship like gods are travelling all over the world during pendency of divorce proceedings. However, care should be taken that the party travelling/residing abroad make himself/herself available whenever required to decide the case.
4. If there is no restriction on travelling, why passport be denied ?
5. If muderers are given bail, why injustice to people faced with divorce cases. Until proved guilty everyone has the right to lead normal life.
As regards discussion, we can discuss the issue of "dowry" and its adverse impact on our community. Yes, I am of the view that this evil is eating into the moral of our community. Some people stoop so low when they have a marriageable boys that they behave like arrogant beggers. However, there are some "kahndani" jats who would not accept more than what is required ritually.
However, I am of the view that unless more facts about the instant case are known to us, it is of no use to discss it further. There are certain things which are known to the concerned parties only, consummation of marriage and demand of dowry included, and only the experts i.e. doctors and courts can decide the dispute on the basis of evidence.
When we discuss about other personalities like Gandhis and Nehrus, our comments are based on the literary knowledge. We are not omnipresent and most of the time we base our arguments on what we have read or heard. But in the case of Mr. Hooda's dowry case, not sufficient information has become available in press or otherwise except the allegations. Hence, the case does not fall in the "free-for-all discussion" and it would be prudent to wait for the judgement.
