Homelessness a major problem in India: UN

United Nation’s special rapporteur on the right to housing, Leilam Farha has warned that homelessness is a major problem in India. Farha called the government of India to take immediate action to ensure adequate housing for the disadvantaged within the country. She stated, “I am extremely concerned for the millions of people who experience exclusion, discrimination, evictions, insecure tenure etc.” She pointed out that most of the times evictions are carried out without any warning and that these atrocities affect the most vulnerable populations in India.
Earlier, in March, Farha warned that homelessness is increasing in every country due to government inaction. Homelessness remains a problem throughout the world. In August, the US Department of Justice challenged an Idaho city ordinance that criminalized sleeping in public places by the homeless.
In India, according to the official estimates, the present shortage of houses is about 7 millions in urban areas. About 19 per cent of the families live in less than 10 square meters of space leading to congestion. For example, about 44 per cent of the families in urban areas live in one room only.
The housing activity in our country is essentially a private sector activity. The State intervenes only to provide legal status to land. The State intervention is minimal. The legal frame work is mostly aimed at protecting the interests of landlords rather than the tenants. Order XV-A , for example, gives a free handle to the unscrupulous landlord to claim any amount as arrears of rent though there may be none and it gives wide discretion to the court to pass the order directing the tenant to deposit the so-called arrears of rent as a perquisite to defend his case. Similarly, in many instances it has been observed that even when an objection application against the execution petition filed by the decree-holder is pending, the execution warrant is issued by the court thereby rendering the objection application infructuous.
Unfortunately, there is hardly any legal framework in our country which sympathetically considers the tenants’ vows. The lawmakers are mostly the owners of the houses that are let out. These houses are generally constructed with the help of bank loans which come from public money. Many have invested their black money in the housing sector. Therefore, obviously there is no reason to sympathise with landlords who often indulge in arm-twisting methods to extract unreasonably high rents.
Indeed, there is an urgent need to have a central pro-tenant building tenants law in the country to offer requisite legal protection to the tenants.
Legal Circles echoes in Parliament
The voice of Legal Circles, published in these columns on April 25 was echoed in the parliament instantly. Lok Sabha member of parliament Arjun Ram Meghwal (BJP) raised the issue of dragging the constitutional dignitaries like the President, Prime Minister, etc in unnecessary controversies by the High Courts and Supreme Court. Meghwal appealed to the courts to desist from offering what he termed as “the running commentary” on these dignitaries.
Going by the thumping response to Meghwal’s appeal it is certain that the Parliament has not taken some of the recent observations of the higher courts against the constitutional dignitaries lightly. The undrawn yet fairly understood LoC between the Parliament, judiciary and executive has to be scrupulously observed by these three pillars of the Constitution in the interest of the country.
Dancing in the bar
It is reported that a division bench of the Supreme Court in course of hearing of the case relating to the permission to bar owners to have bar girls dancing subject to certain conditions, observed that dancing in the bars was better than begging for women.
Though this observation has so far not stirred the hornet’s nest and louder protests from the women rights groups, the statement if true, is to say the least, uncharitable to the womanfolk. May be the intention of the learned judges be good in deprecating the State government’s inaction in framing the rules for the bars in this regard, but it sends out a wrong message to the society.
In a country like ours where women are worshipped like Goddesses, saying the dancing was better than begging would tantamount to belittling the women. On the other hand, is it not true that the people by and large, barring a few who visit bars, are of the opinion that begging is better than dancing in the bars? A self-respecting woman would never take up dancing in the bar as her occupation except a few who are lured by the offers of big money. There are umpteen cases, known and unknown, where a woman of pride has preferred to work as farm or factory labourer or domestic servant and even to beg to support her and her children. While the protagonists of freedom may see nothing wrong in the women dancing in bars, to say the least, that is not in our culture. Restrictions notwithstanding, it would encourage obscenity and other criminalities for sure.
Seer acquitted
The Jagatguru Shankaracharya of Kanchi pith, Swamy Jayendra Saraswati hand eight others have been acquitted by a Chennai court in what is known as Radhakrishna assault case accusing him, among others, of criminal conspiracy.
The Seer, respected by millions of Hindu as their spiritual leader was arrested and put behind the bars several years ago. He faced ignobility and insult at the hands of prosecutors. His followers suffered deep shock and sorrow disbelieving what the Seer was accused of. Now the court has honourably acquitted him but a million dollar question remains: what about the huge damage done not only to the Seer but also to his followers? Who would compensate them ? In fact, this is a vital question almost in all such cases. The criminal law provides remedy for vexatious litigations but it is silent on the cases of acquittal due to lack of or insufficient evidence. To overcome such a situation, an amendment to the Cr.P.C or I.P.C is necessary.

DR H C UPADHYAY