Gay businessman taken to court by wife

Times Of India

6 Mar 2009, 0305 hrs IST, Kartikeya, TNN

MUMBAI: A sessions
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Wife-takes-gay-businessman-to-cou
rt/articleshow/4231318.cms> court at Fort has been busy hearing an unusual
matter-a wealthy businessman and a sailor with the merchant navy have had to
plead protection from arrest after the wife of the former alleged that the
duo was in a homosexual relationship. The Gamdevi police even registered a
case under Section 377 of the IPC-the
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Wife-takes-gay-businessman-to-cou
rt/articleshow/4231318.cms> law that criminalises homosexual
relations-against the two. 

Ratan Shrivastav, 39, a resident of Peddar Road, and his wife Pooja, 37, got
married in 1994 and have an eight-year-old son. Pooja, however, alleges that
Ratan "kept having
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Wife-takes-gay-businessman-to-cou
rt/articleshow/4231318.cms> relationships with several men" which was
"hampering her married life". She also said that she had often sent Ratan to
a counsellor but that did not improve their marital relations. The complaint
also says that there are CDs in which Ratan can be seen in a compromising
position with other men. 

In his anticipatory bail plea, Ratan did not deny that he was gay. He said
he first went to the cops in January when he was told that a non-cognisable
complaint had been registered against him for slapping Pooja. 

Mum unaware of son's homosexual relations 

Peddar Road businessman Ratan Shrivastav and his sailor
<http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Cities/Wife-takes-gay-businessman-to-cou
rt/articleshow/4231318.cms> friend moved the court for anticipatory bail
after Ratan's wife lodged a non-cognisable complaint against them at Gamdevi
police station. Thereafter, a police constable even came to his residence on
February 9 and asked his mother whether Ratan was a homosexual. 

His mother replied that it was his personal matter and she had no knowledge
of it. 

Ratan moved court on February 27 when he realised that on a specific
complaint by Pooja the police had registered a case under Section 377
against him and his alleged partner, Damien Christopher, 28, the sailor.
Ratan feared that he was going to be arrested for custodial interrogation
since homosexuality remains a cognizable offence under Indian law. He thus
rushed to court for protection and the same day was granted interim
anticipatory bail till March 7. 

On Thursday, the court heard the anticipatory bail plea of Christopher.
Judge D U Mulla wondered whether there was any need for custody in such
matters. He observed that there was no evidence that Pooja had been harassed
or whether police needed to collect any material evidence. The court granted
anticipatory bail to Christopher. Ratan's own plea will come up for hearing
again on Saturday. 

(Names have been changed to protect the identities of the parties involved)

 

Indian Express


After FIR by wife, 'gay' husband gets anticipatory bail


Font Size 

 
<http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/after-fir-by-wife-gay-husband-gets-
anticipatory-bail/431610/> -A
<http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/after-fir-by-wife-gay-husband-gets-
anticipatory-bail/431610/> +A


Express News Service


Posted: Mar 06, 2009 at 0257 hrs A Woman accused her husband and another man
of indulging in "unnatural sex", after which the husband moved court and was
granted anticipatory bail. The woman had filed a complaint with the Gamdevi
police; a sessions court on Thursday granted the anticipatory bail. 

Sessions judge DU Mulla granted the bail to Joseph Mascarenhas (name
changed) who works with Merchant Navy. Mascarenhas said he used to contact
the complainant's husband through the Internet. 

The husband has applied for anticipatory bail. He has admitted in his plea
that he is gay and has had more than a partner since 1994. Husband's lawyer
Vivek Kantawala said, "We have moved the court and it will hear the plea on
Saturday. Since it's a sensitive matter dealing with a couple's marriage, I
will not divulge any information." 

Mascarenhas said in his plea that the duo used to meet whenever he came to
the city. The complainant and her husband, who stay in a plush flat on
Pedder Road in South Mumbai, were married in 1994 and have a seven-year-old
child. The complainant's husband said in his plea that his wife had
initially taken him to counsellors hoping that his bisexual nature was
temporary. In January, she registered a non-cognizable offence against him.
The police called him to the police station and let him go after discussion.


The wife made complaints to the police about being manhandled by her
husband. The latter, anticipating arrest, had moved the court and got
interim relief. On repeated complaints from the wife, the police filed a
first information report against the alleged gay couple on February 16,
under Sections 377 (unnatural sex), 504 (intentional insult with intent to
provoke breach of peace) and 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous
weapons or means) of the IPC. The complainant had provided two CDs of the
accused indulging in unnatural sex, which the police claim as evidence. 

While hearing the plea of Mascarenhas, the prosecution said he might flee.
But the court said there was no requirement of custodial interrogation as
there was no seizure to be made and there was no evidence that he had
harassed his wife. 

DNA


Wife wants hubby punished for 'gay abandon'


Menaka Rao

Friday, March 6, 2009 3:10 IST


 <javascript:emailArticle(1236742,1);> EmailEmail

        

 <http://www.dnaindia.com/dnaprint.asp?newsid=1236742> PrintPrint

        

 <javascript:change_text_size1()> Text sizeText

        

 <http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?newsid=1236742#share> ShareShare

Mumbai: The wife of a Peddar Road businessman has filed a complaint against
him and his alleged partner accusing them of having unnatural sex --
homosexuality in other words. 

In her complaint filed under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, Rohini,
37, said that she wants to "punish them". Section 377 stipulates life
imprisonment for those who voluntarily have "carnal intercourse against the
order of nature". 

After the complaint was filed, the businessman, Anand Mathur, and his
alleged lover, Rommel Fernandes, approached the sessions court for
anticipatory bail. Their applications do not deny allegations of
homosexuality. Fernandes, who works in the merchant navy, was granted
anticipatory bail; Mathur's application is pending. 

Mathur, 40, married Rohini in 1994. The two stayed in a Peddar Road flat
with Mathur's parents. In her complaint, Rohini said that she became aware
of her husband's "homosexuality" in 1998. 

Mathur, Rohini said, confessed to her that he had acquired the "strange
habit" when he was a teen. He, however, vowed not to get involved with any
man in future, she said. On her insistence, Mathur even underwent
counselling, she said. The couple then had a son in 2001. 

But, she had an inkling that her husband still had sexual relations with
men. The two frequently had arguments about his sexual preference and many a
time she left home to live with her parents, Rohini said.

The complaint claimed that in 2007, Mathur confessed to the counsellor that
he had found a partner, Fernandes, through an internet site and that he was
having sexual relations with him. Fernandes' job in merchant navy
occasionally brought him to Mumbai since 2006, it said.

Rohini filed the first information report at the Gamdevi police station on
February 16. The police said that during investigations, they found two CDs
with "incriminating material" against the accused.

Rohini's lawyer Ameta Kuttikrishnan on Thursday opposed Fernandes'
application saying his relationship with Mathur had "hampered" her client's
married life. "I'm apprehending that they (Mathur and Fernandes) will get
back together. Some strict punishment is required," she said. 

Additional sessions judge DU Mulla asked if Rohini still resided with her
husband. When he was told she did, the judge asked: "Why are you still
residing with him. How can you justify your demand (for the police custody
of the accused)? Your problem is not going to be solved like this." 

Judge Mulla, while granting anticipatory bail to Fernandes, observed that no
other evidence needs to be collected in the case and there are no
allegations of Rohini being harassed.

Mathur's anticipatory bail plea will come up for hearing on Saturday. His
lawyer, Vivek Kantawala, refused to comment on the case.
(Names changed to protect identities)

 

 

 

Email:

 <mailto:modera...@gaybombay.in> modera...@gaybombay.in

 

Web Sites:

 <http://www.gaybombay.in> www.gaybombay.in

 <http://www.gaybombay.info> www.gaybombay.info

 <http://www.gayindia.org> www.gayindia.org

 

E Groups:

 <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gay_bombay>
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gay_bombay

 <http://groups.google.com/group/Gaybombay>
http://groups.google.com/group/Gaybombay

 

Blogs:

 <http://gaybombay.blogspot.com/> http://gaybombay.blogspot.com

 <http://gaybombay.wordpress.com/> http://gaybombay.wordpress.com

 

Twitter

 <http://twitter.com/gaybombay> http://twitter.com/gaybombay

 

<<attachment: image001.gif>>

<<attachment: image002.gif>>

<<attachment: image003.gif>>

<<attachment: image004.gif>>

Reply via email to