Lets say my view is not always the final view

It is stupidity & foolish to think that the founding fathers were intelligent & their conception of "principles" are eternal & it should be followed in all Supreme Court judgements. India has vast history & long list of scriptures, which have some eternal principles stated in detail with focus on attainment of god, whereas supreme court through its loopsided view (western view) permitted same sex marriages & promotes sex amongst same sex, which animal world has NONE such examples. Supreme Court judgement on Sabarimalai temple is another grossly wronged judement, for the judges seems to have no knowledge of hindu scriptures & tantra practices. While I do not say that women are forbidded to pray Lord Muruga, but there are some places where to maintain sanctity & purity, women are disallowed. Grandpa Bhisma after his oath of "brahmacharya" no women was allowed to his chambers.... it is only that Yagna born Draupadi entered the chambers, Grandpa Bhisma through intuition sensed her entry. Bhisma always met people in the public main halls. Draupadi being Yagna kanya, she was permitted due to her purity of thoughts & she was "devotee" of Lord Krishna & Bhisma also happened to be advanced devotee of Lord Krishna. She was allowed as same faith follower & ofcourse, she was grand daughter-in-law. In entire Mahabharat Draupadi was the only person meeting Bhisma in his chambers in presence of Drona & Vidura. The entry to Sabarimalai temple is NOT due to gender, but of "nista" paddhati. more  

S.C. 2nd Judgment [1st in 1985] on Sec.497 AIR 1988 SC 835 held that “ there was no discrimination based on sex and these provisions were valid. The underlying object of these sections appear to be that as between the husband and wife social good will be served by permitting them to ‘take up’ or ‘break up’ the matrimonial tie rather than to drag each other to the criminal court. They can either condone the offence in a spirit of ‘forgive and forget’ and live together or separate by appropriate action in a matrimonial court. It does not arm the two spouses to hit each other with the weapon of Criminal Law. The offence of adultery can only be committed by a man, not by a woman. The wise cannot be punished even as an abettor.’ ” 1.”‘Equality before law’ is a somewhat negative concept implying the absence of any special privilege n favour of individual and the equal subject of all classes top the ordinary law”. “ ‘Equal protection of the law’ is a more positive concept implying equality of treatment in equal circumstances. ‘’ However, one dominant idea common to both the expressions is that of equal Justice. 2.The concept of equality does not mean absolute equality among human beings which is physically not possible to achieve. It is a concept implying absence of any special privilege by reason of birth, creed or the like in favour of any individual, and also the equal subject of all individuals and classes to the ordinary law of the land. “Equality before law means that among equals the law should be equal and should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and be prosecuted for the same kind of action should be same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence” . [But, the most important factors of Morality and Natural Justice together with the Social ethics of Safety that had been in practice RESULTED IN DISCRIMINATIONS in many issues ] 3. “While Article 14 forbids class legislation, it does not forbid reasonable classification of persons, objects and transactions by the legislature for the purpose of achieving specific ends. But classification must not be ‘arbitrary, artificial or evasive’. It must always rest upon some real and substantial distinction bearing a just and reasonable relation to the object sought to be achieved by the legislature.”-1952 “What is necessary is that there must be a nexus between the basis of classification and the object o the Act which makes the classification.”-1952 “ The classification made by a legislature need not be scientifically perfect or logically complete.” -1953 “Equal treatment does not mean identical treatment. Similarly, not identity of treatment is enough. “1951 “There can be discrimination both in the substantive as well as the procedural law. Article 14 applies to both.”-1952 4. “Women and children require special treatment on account of their very nature. Women’s physical structure and the performance of maternal functions place her at a disadvantage in the struggle for subsistence and her physical well-being becomes an object of public interest land care in order to preserve the strength and vigour of the race.” 5. S.C. judging the validity of law under Article 14 confined that “ The rules of Natural Justice owed their origin to ethical and moral Code. It there any doubt that they have become the integral and inseparable parts of rule of law which any civilised society is proud of ? Can any body be bold enough to assert that ethics and morality are outside the field of legal formulations ? Socio-economic justice stems from the concept of social morality coupled with abhorrence for economic exploitation and the advancing society converts in course of time moral and ethical Code into enforceable legal formulations. “ FROM THE ABOVE , THE CONCEPT OF ethics and moral code of Society ; Safety, calibre and qualities of Women Gender ; require specific protection not only in the Civil Laws, but also guarding provisions under the Criminal law. This aspect that was concluded and upheld in the Judgments quoted above in point 1 to 4 are the naturally, morally, Socially tied legal security under ethics of Social norms differentiating the rights of Sex in Male and Female in Human Beings strictly setting away from other Beings as far as Equality is concerned. This aspect only guarded well the Women and Children and such provisions do not fall under the issue of discrimination . 6. It is thus, the issue of Sexual Rights is more on a Social Nature and even then, individual rights on Sexual desires shall be restricted for the well being of the Society as a whole. This is why, the Laws of Marriage and Divorce were wisely adopted with specific Sections to deal with only this Social Safety Concept. HENCE THESE ISSUES ARE NOT TO BE KEPT AWAY FROM CRIMINAL IMPOSITIONS and is the only Justice under any Rule . It should be noted and ever memorised that “ Equality before law “ is of English Origin ; “Equal Protection of the Law “ is taken from the American Constitution AND THESE EXPRESSIONS AIM AT ESTABLISHING WHAT IS CALLED “EQUALITY OF STATUS” IN THE PREAMBLE OF OUR CONSTITUTION. The issue of ‘equality of status’ is so to be regarded as explained above in the S.C. Judgments cited above and is only the Justified carry of Equality more  

Most Important guarantees staged in Constituent Assembly also getting ignored like Many Mandates of Constitution neglected in implementation. Marriage is the foundation of happiness in family and its strength gives stability to society. Law gives protection to marital ties by punishing their violations by affording adequate remedies in civil law and prescribing severe punishments in criminal law. 1.IPC Sec 493 and 496 describe Mock or invalid marriages and Sec 13 of Hindu Marriages Act in its 1st place addressed void and voidable Marriages. These permits Divorce to the person deceived and punish the person indulged in Deceitful Marriage. Even concealing earlier Marriage by either of the Spouse is thus dressed for Divorce. This is the Morally Justified address in terms of Female Modesty, sanctity and Male decency and etiquette. Considering the Essence of these Sections of both Civil and Criminal Law, allowing or non criminalizing Consent, Adultery and Connivance are thus MORALLY, SOCIALLY ALSO UNJUSTIFIED which challenge very Justice on the concept of Marriage/Conjugation, Conjugal Rights , Female Modesty, Sanctity and Male decency and etiquette. The Comment of Law commission ´ Rape and unlawful sex “ destroys woman’s supreme honour. It is forcible ravishment of a woman. Literally it means forcible seizure. It has always been regarded as an offence of great heinousness. This offence owes its enormity to the defilement and dishonour it reflects on the whole family. If men prize anything above all others it is the honour of their women and their forcible ravishment naturally stirs up all those feelings of retaliation and revenge which have resulted in so many criminal offences too ” is the essence of these issues. Further, Marriage is the legally recognised method for sexual satisfaction between man and woman. Marriage is the sacrament between two Families of Male and Female agreeing to get married. Lately, Marriage is also the contract by which a woman consents to have continued cohabitation with her husband. The Laws of Divorce were concluded only on this concept. The increasing Rapes and Unlawful Sex Offences shall be mandated for strict punishment amending the IPC Sections pertaining to Rape, Adultery Consent and Connivance. And, Laws of Divorce concluded in Section 13 referred above need to be enforced strictly removing all litigations that are resulting in distress both in the Female and Male Spouses. The IPC 377 was also addressed with these concepts of Marriage, Conjugation, Conjugal rights of both Male and Female that are upheld as sacramentory under the moral, social and justified consensus of Female Modesty,Sanctity and, Male decency and etiquette. Sex and Sexual intercourse is unnatural and unscientific between men to men ; women to women OR, either Human with animals SINCE THIS NATURE ACCELERATES UNLAWFUL, UNJUSTIFIED, AND UN-NATURAL SEX LEADING “ SEX AS ONLY NATURAL EXERCISE OF PHYSICAL BODY” THAT PERSIST ONLY IN ANIMALS, BIRDS AND OTHER BEINGS . Human being is absolutely different from these other living beings and, the dangerous issue of placing and authorizing Sexual Intercourse as simple natural exercise of physical body THAT COVERS ALL LIVING BEINGS LIKE HUMAN BEINGS ; CATTLE ; ANIMALS ; BIRDS ETC., of the Universe. This is such a dangerous concept and method that certainly view all physical bodies as equal as the animals we see in the nature. AND, SAFETY, SECURITY, PEACE AND PLEASANT LIFE LEAD THAT ARE REQUIRED MOSTLY IN HUMAN BEINGS WILL GET ERASED. We are misusing Sheep ; Goats ; Hens etc., etc., for hunger of Food while Banned many under article 48 A. This article in an unjustified manner set protection of only Forests and Wild life leaving those beings living along-with Human beings in the Civic Life. 2. IPC Sec. 494 and 495 disallow Bigamy that earlier persistent along with persistent Prostitution. The mandate of Sec. 494 was purposed for eradicating many social unrests and ways lead to Mischief, Affray, Quarrels, Assaults, immoral issues of Consents and even lead to increase in muscle and Money -power that result in break of peace in the Society in all cases where the Rule is inefficient and not being committed to carry of prompt Society. Prostitution which was banned after 1980 [ i think ] is to be reinstated Regulating with Safety Conditions of Health and Security to address the real needy due to poverty or, self preference for Sexual intercourse without damaging anybody’s Modesty, Sanctity and etiquette . IT IS NEEDLESS TO REITERATE THAT THE COUNTRY ALREADY HAD THE PRACTICE OF POLYGAMY IN SOME CLASSES that carried against this concept of Bigamy under law in an unjustified manner through these decades of independent rule . This issue of Bigamy also ever stood unjustified and against to its concept and the following ISSUE/CASE will explain : " The words ' Husband and wife ' mean persons who are legally such. Suppose a man marries A, and then marries B during the life-time of A and then marries C ; he commits bigamy by his marriage with B, and again by his marriage with C, if A is living. But if A had died before the marriage with C, but B was still living, he would not have committed bigamy because B was never his wife as legally construed . THIS ALSO TENDERS amendments to the laws pertaining to unlawful Sexual Intercourse AND , the Rape comprehensively removing the issues of Consent, Connivance, Adultery and their exemptions under Sections of IPC. 3. IPC Sec. 497 allows and exempts Consent, Adultery and Connivance and IS INDEED IMMORAL THAT RUINS THE SANCTITY, ETIQUETTE AND CONSENSUS OF HUMAN REQUISITES FOR A SAFE, PEACEFUL, PLEASANT AND SECURED SOCIETY . Yes. This only given way for challenging concept of rights on individual Sex just on the concluded version of “SEXUAL INTERCOURSE THAT RECOGNIZED AS NATURAL EXERCISE OF PHYSICAL BODY” . This is absolutely a wrong version. The justified moral and legal concept shall be that “Law recognizes Sexual intercourse as natural exercise of Human Body” which is absolutely based on the Gender Qualities and, the Sex precipitating Hormones . Yes this is why, the learned Law Counsels together with those of un-known period of Universe, recognized and concluded the MORAL, SOCIAL, SAFE AND PEACEFUL MANDATES OF MARRIAGE AND EVER GUARDED CONJUGATION . The entire concept of Birth Giving Quality of Female, Birth causing Quality of Male and the essentially necessary guarding elements of Secured Safe Status for livelihood of Human Beings was wisely addressed with MARRIAGE AND CONJUGATION THAT EXPLAINED IN PREAMBLE AND POINT -1- ABOVE . Thus, the issue of Consent, Adultery and Connivance are the issues that cause challenge and even ruin ‘Humanity, Morality, Decency, Female Modesty, Etiquette, Sanctity, Tranquility, and Cohesive consensus of FAMILY IN INDIA WHICH ONLY IS THE Safe and Secured guarantee to both Female and Male Gender. 4. All the above 3 tenders for a comprehensive thought and mandates Regulations in terms of Safety, Security and Guaranteed Peaceful Life in the Living Human Society and , to be enforced without any deviation as like the guarantees of Preamble of the Constitution that had been ignored in the Rule of the Country. more