Case in Brief:

Yejjala Kumari(20 years), D/o Y. Yerakaiah, R/o Locharla Village, Therlam Mandal, Vijayanagaram District. She was studying B.A Final year in a Social Welfare Hostel which is located at Dasannapet, Ring Road, Vijayanagram District. She belonged to SC- Madiga community. Ch. Nirmala, Sree Devi, Vijayashanthi were friends of Kumari who were studying along with her. The victim was forced to love Vasudeva Rao a Non Dalit by her friend Ch. Nirmala. She was forced to enter into Sexual Relation with the accused by false promises that he will marry her. Later he planned to marry another woman. When Kumari asked to marry, she was harassed, threatened and humiliated by her caste name. She was also warned to withdraw the complaint lodged in the police station. The complaint was registered U/S IPC 420, 506 & 3 (XI) SC/ST Act.  

Neelakantapuram village is in Lakkavarapukota mandal in Vijayanagaram district in Andhra Pradesh. There is also another village called Pedaredlapalem near that village. Total 90 families are living in these two villages. In Neelakantapuram 15 families are living. Two BCs and the rest are SCs. In pedaredlapalem only Ayyarapu Patrulu (OC) caste people are living. Dalits (SCs) in this village are labour and they are supposed to work only for the OCs i.e in their houses and fields. This village does not have any kind of facilities like school, hospital, water, roads etc. The OC is a dominating caste and Untouchability practice exists in the village. If someone raises voice against the dominant people then they will be taught lesson.

Pachipegula Bangarayya (49 years) is a resident of Neelakantapuram village is in Lakkavarapukota mandal in Vijayanagaram district in Andhra Pradesh. His wife name is Erukamma (42 years). He has a son Rajesh (21) and a daughter Jyothi (25). He belongs to SC (Mala) caste. Since 5 years he is working for Rs.1200/ per month in the house of Pediredla Sanyasi Rao (Lawyer) who belongs to OC (Ayyana Patrudu) caste, at present he is staying in Vizag with his cousin Ramana. He has not given salary since 1 year. On January 13 he sent his son Rajesh to Sanyasi Rao’s office for the salary.  He abused Rajesh in front of everybody and gave Rs.1000/- and said he will give the remaining amount when he comes to the village. On January 17 when Bangarayya came to know that Sanyasi Rao has come to the village, he went to his house to ask the money. He went to the house thrice but there was no response from Sanyasi Rao. Then Bangarayya asked for the money loudly and sat on the corridor. After 10 minutes Sanyasi Rao and Ramana came with acid bottle and poured on the Bangarayya’s head. Sanyasi Rao’s relative poured water on Bangarayya and Ramana who was taking him to hospital left him in the middle of the road and said the diesel was over. Then Bangarayya’s son took him to hospital. In the night, about 10’ clock (17^th January 2006) he gave a complaint to the police. He got treatment in the KGH hospital for 3 months 20 days His son borrowed money (1 lakh Rupees) for his father’s treatment.

Because of the acid attack he lost his eyesight and his ears got closed and he became deaf. His nerves stopped working and he is not able to stand and do his work. Even he has lost his livelihood but not yet received any kind of compensation. When his son went to police to file complaint, police refused and asked him to go and talk to DSP. When Rajesh was coming back from the police station he was kidnapped and shaved his head and moustache and the accused then left him on the railway track. Charge sheet is not filed. Victim’s son got a job.

Case in Brief:

The victim is an orphan and was in love with Ramesh, taxi driver and got aborted thrice.  The accused has first refused to marry her and when pressurized, he is demanding for dowry.

Present situation:

                  FIR not registered.

Recommendations:

•      .FIR should be registered immediately and the accused should be arrested.
•      Authorities should implement the Domestic Violence Act.

Case in Brief:                         

Lova Kumari and Varaprasad were in love for 3 years and developed physical intimacy.  A boy child was born and he refused to marry her.  She did hunger strike infront of the accuser’s house.

Present situation:

FIR not registered

Recommendations:

•      FIR should be registered, accused should marry the victim.  
•      Authorities should implement the Domestic Violence Act.

Pali is located 303 km from Jaipur and 3km from the District Headquarter. Lali Devi (45) w/o Bhanwar Lal is r/o Pali. Lali’s husband Bhanwar lal had been suffering from cancer for last 2 years. She used to go to Jodhpur for his treatment.

One day Lali’s neighbor namely Meesia called Lali at her home. When Lali went, she found Meesia’s husband Bhanwar Lal was already present in the room. As Lali entered into the room, Bhanwar Lal closed the door and striped Lali naked and forcibly raped her. Meesia stood out to guard her husband. Lali tried her best to rescue herself from Bhanwar but all went in vain. After that, Bhanwar Lal left her and threatened her not to tell anyone about the incident or else he would kill her. Lali returned home and did not say anything to her husband.

But the incident did not end here, accused started blackmailing Lali and asked for money otherwise they will open the secret and she will loose dignity in her family and will face social boycott from the community. Lali became helpless and started giving 2000 to 4000 Rs. Per month to them to keep their mouth shut.  Accused used to come to Lali’s home and take money from her. This had gone for a year and half. When she took her husband to Jodhpur for treatment, the accused followed her and even did not allow her to go for the job. When she protested, he brawled with her husband and daily compelled her for intercourse. He also took objectionable photographs of Lali, blackmailed her and took her house papers, gold earrings, bank pass books. But one day Lali decided to speak out this violence.

On March 7, 2006, she went to the police station and lodged complaint against the accused. A case was registered on 7 March, 2006, No. 22/06, u/s 376, 120b IPC. The Local Police started investigation and without considering the right facts of the incident.

She was continuously threatened by the accused to compromise in the case. Accused threatened Lali and her son to show her objectionable pictures in society and terrorized that they will not let her. She reported to the police about it but the police did nothing in this regard. Accused was not arrested even after long time. Finally, Lali Devi was compelled by the circumstances to compromise in the case.