Is the gov't really just that unorganized that **** like this goes on?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/worl...11059-2058r.htm
Victim ordered to wed rapist
By Shaikh Azizur Rahman
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 19, 2005
BOMBAY -- Hard-line Islamic clerics in a northern Indian village have declared that a woman's 10-year-old marriage was nullified when her father-in-law raped her -- and ordered the mother of five to marry the rapist.
The fatwa, or religious edict, was issued by Darool Uloom Deoband, South Asia's most powerful Islamic theological school known for promoting a radical brand of Islam that is said to have inspired the Taliban in Afghanistan.
The decision has outraged both Muslim and Hindu leaders and prompted a fierce debate that has dominated the front pages of national newspapers across India.
The fatwa ordered Imrana Ilahi, 28, to separate from her husband and treat him as her son because she had sex with his father.
"She had a physical relationship with her father-in-law, and it nullifies her marriage," said Mohammad Masood Madani, a cleric at the theological school. He said it made no difference whether the sex was consensual or forced. The village council then decreed that Mrs. Ilahi would have to marry her father-in-law.
Feminists and liberal Muslims reacted with fury, staging nationwide street protests.
But Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh on June 29 supported the fatwa, saying: "The decision of the Muslim religious leaders in the Imrana case must have been taken after a lot of thought. ... The religious leaders are all very learned and they understand the Muslim community and its sentiments."
The rape took place June 4 in the village of Charthawal in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, when Mrs. Ilahi's husband, Noor Ilahi, was away.
When Mr. Ilahi, a brick kiln laborer, learned of the attack, the village court instructed him to divorce his wife.
But Mr. Ilahi, 32, told his wife: "My father is dirty and you are clean. I still love you and I cannot desert you." Mrs. Ilahi, with her husband and five children, sneaked out of Charthawal and took shelter in Kukra, the village of her parents.
Mrs. Ilahi received another rude shock when the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the country's most influential Muslim umbrella organization, endorsed the punishment meted out by Darool Uloom Deoband.
"The fact that the woman was 'used' by her husband's blood relative makes her [unclean] for her husband and there is no way she can be allowed to live with him," the law board said.
Under Shariah law, the rape has made her the mother of her husband, said Naseem Iqtedar, the law board's only female member.
Outraged leaders of Muslim social organizations met with Mrs. Ilahi's family and took them to police. Police immediately took Mohammad Ali, Mrs. Ilahi's 65-year-old father-in-law, into custody and ordered a medical test of Mrs. Ilahi for the rape.
Although the All India Muslim Personal Law Board supported the fatwa, the All India Muslim Women Personal Law Board decried it and asked Mrs. Ilahi and her husband not to separate.
"The fatwa goes against the light of Koran. No tenet of Koran can justify the injustice done to an innocent victim. Imrana should never be punished for no fault of hers. The victim has every right to continue with her marriage and live with her husband," said Shaista Amber, president of women's law board.
"The Islamic clerics have failed to differentiate between sex by consent and rape by force. The ruling was against the spirit and essence of Islam, which gives equal rights to women."
Javed Akhtar, a noted Muslim poet, said: "Islam teaches compassion, justice, equality and a fair deal for women. The fatwa, on the other hand, appears to treat women as mere commodities."
Although police have filed a case against her father-in-law, legal analysts say, Mrs. Ilahi might not be able to prove the crime because she underwent the medical examination almost two weeks after the attack and "doctors could not find any definite sign of the rape."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------And this story
Man spent 54 years in jail without a trial, pays 2 cents to get out
A villager in India's north-eastern state of Assam has been released from prison after spending more than half a century behind bars without a trial.
Seventy-seven year old Machang Lalung was arrested in 1951 from his native village of Silsang, 64km (40 miles) from the state's main city of Guwahati.
Police said that Mr Lalung, who is from the Lalung tribe, was booked for "causing grievous hurt".
The offence normally results in 10 years imprisonment.
But police said there was no evidence to support the allegation, so within a year of his arrest, he was transferred to a psychiatric institution.
"It seems the police just forgot about him thereafter," says Assamese human rights activist Sanjay Borbora.
In 1967, the authorities at the institution certified Mr Lalung as "fully fit" and said that they intended to release him.
But instead of being freed, police transferred him to another jail.
"Even at this point, the police did not send him to court to face trial, they just kept him in prison," Mr Borbora said.
Strangely, even his relatives and family members forgot about Machang Lalung.
Last year, local human rights activists brought Machang's case to the attention of the National Human Rights Commission, which took up the case immediately and sought his release.
He was finally freed last week after paying a token personal bond of one rupee (two cents).
Magistrate HK Sarma, who released Mr Lalung, lashed out at the Assamese and Indian "snail-paced and inefficient" legal system.
"Neither the executive nor the judiciary avoid responsibility for Machang Lalung's detention for so long on the grounds of mere procedure or technicalities," Mr Sarma said.
"At stake is the question of life and liberty of a person in judicial custody for 54 years, who was not brought to trial even long after his recovery from mental illness," he said.
Mr Borbora says Machang should now sue the police - but said that after so long he is perhaps not interested.
"He is a simple villager and his life has been destroyed by a cruel system . He should sue the authorities for millions of rupees but I don't think he is even aware he could it," said Mr Borbora.
After Mr Lalung's release, he was escorted back to his village, where only one villager, Benu Lalung, recognised him.
"We handed him over to the village headman but could not find his family or relatives," said B Das, a police official.
He said that Mr Lalung had almost forgotten about his past and does not remember anything about his village now.
"He just did not react at all when he arrived at Silsang," Mr Das said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4712619.stm