Female foetus not acceptable yet!?
New Delhi: A woman working as Office Assistant in the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) here alleged on Saturday she was brutally assaulted by husband and in-laws when she was pregnant after she refused to abort her female foetus, police said.
The woman, 42, a resident of Sector 49, Gurugram, got married to a Delhi-based doctor, Rajnish Gulati on July 21, 2016. Gulati is associated with Mudit Vishwakarma Hospital and resides in West Patel Nagar, police said.
"The woman in her complaint to police said Gulati, his sister Amita, his uncle Sushil Kumar Nagrath and her mother-in-law Sarla Gulati dragged her from their house after she refused to abort her female foetus, in February this year," the FIR said.
"When I tried to enter my her in-laws' house, my mother-in-law beat her. Later, I complained to Delhi Police but no action was taken against my husband and in-laws," the victim told IANS.
She also alleged in her complaint to Delhi Police Commissioner Amulya Patnaik and Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Rohit Rajbir Singh that Station House Officer (SHO), Pramod Kumar Joshi and a Sub Inspector, Devender, posted in Patel Nagar Police Station traumatised her on many occasion and threatened to fabricate her in wrong cases if she does not take her complaint back.
She also alleged that SHO Joshi, on April 1, 2017, forced her to sit in police station for over six hours and did not let her drink water and eat food, even though she was pregnant.
Her husband also beat her inside the police station. The repeated assault and trauma eventually led to miscarriage.
She later approached Tis Hazari Court against them. During counselling in the court, her husband assured that the matter would be sorted out peacefully and also requested her to issue a written statement that she would not go for any legal action against him and his family members.
He took the victim to his residence but after a week, threw her out from house. The woman made a fresh complaint on Monday (December 25) against her in-laws and SHO Joshi, and sought action.
ACP Rohit Rajbir Singh told IANS that he has received a complaint regarding cruelty on the woman by her husband and in-laws.
"We are examining the matter," the police officer said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Ballari violence: Were cops made scapegoats to cover political failure?
Bengaluru: Across Karnataka, a serious discussion has begun after the violence in Ballari and the swift action taken against police officers who were on the ground that day. The core question being asked is simple: when law and order fails, why are police officers the first to be shown the door, while political responsibility is quietly pushed aside?
The January 1 clash in Ballari was not a sudden street fight. It was a political confrontation involving supporters of two sitting MLAs. A banner related to the unveiling of a Valmiki statue became the flashpoint. What followed was stone-pelting, firing, and the death of a Congress worker. The situation spiralled within hours.
Within a day, Ballari SP Pavan Nejjur was suspended. Soon after, senior officers were reshuffled. Deputy Inspector General of Police Vartika Katiyar was transferred. No official reason was cited in the notification. But the timing made one thing clear: accountability, at least on paper, had been fixed.
Since then, there has been unease within police circles and political debate outside it.
Unconfirmed reports that Nejjur attempted suicide after his suspension were firmly denied by senior officers and the home minister. They said he was safe, resting, and under stress. Still, the very fact that such reports gained traction says something about the pressure officers feel when action is taken overnight, without public clarity.
Opposition leaders have called Nejjur a scapegoat, pointing out that he had taken charge only hours before the violence. They have asked how an officer can be blamed for a political clash he barely had time to assess. They have also drawn parallels with earlier incidents where police leadership was suspended after tragedies, while political decision-making remained untouched.
However, responding to this criticism, Home Minister G Parameshwara rejected the argument that the suspension was unfair because Nejjur had assumed charge only hours earlier. “It is not important whether he reported to duty on the same day (of incident) or one hour back. Duty is duty. He is not new to the department. IPS officers are trained to handle such situations any time. If he had acted swiftly and promptly, he could have prevented the situation from escalating.” He had said adding that Nejjur did not discharge his duties properly and that this was the reason for his suspension.
Now, fresh and unconfirmed reports suggest that Vartika Katiyar may have met a senior cabinet minister, questioning why she was made to pay the price for a situation that was political in nature. There is no official confirmation of this meeting. But the talk itself has added fuel to the debate.
What is being discussed in the state is not whether the police made mistakes. Many acknowledge that the situation on January 1 was mishandled. A clash earlier in the day was allowed to cool down without strong preventive action. Later, a banner came up near a politically sensitive location. The crowd should not have been allowed to build up. Better anticipation was needed.
At the same time, critics are asking whether the entire burden can be placed on officers when the trigger itself was political rivalry. Who installed the banner? Who mobilised supporters? Who had armed private gunmen present at the spot? These are questions that are still part of the investigation, yet administrative punishment moved faster than political accountability.
This has led to a wider comparison with past incidents, including the Bengaluru stampede after the RCB victory celebrations. There too, police officers were suspended after lives were lost, while decisions taken at higher levels were defended as unavoidable. Many are now saying Ballari fits into the same pattern.
The argument being made is not that the police are blameless. The argument is that responsibility appears to stop at the uniform. When things go wrong, officers are transferred or suspended to send a message. But when the violence is rooted in political rivalry, that message feels incomplete.
Within police ranks, there is also quiet concern about working conditions. Officers say they are expected to manage volatile political situations overnight, often with little room to push back against powerful interests. When things hold, they are invisible. When they collapse, they stand alone.
The Ballari episode has once again exposed this fault line.
For the government, the challenge is larger than one suspension or transfer. The real test is whether it is willing to publicly acknowledge political failures when law and order breaks down, instead of letting the system suggest that the police alone dropped the ball.
For now, what remains is a growing feeling across Karnataka that accountability is selective. And that whenever politics turns violent, the easiest answer is to change the officers, not the decisions that led to the violence in the first place.
