Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 30 (0.94 seconds)The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
Rajinder Singh vs State Of Punjab on 26 February, 2015
23. Hon'ble the Apex Court in Rajinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra) has distinguished the law laid down in Dinesh vs. State of Haryana reported in 2014 (5) SCALE 641, in the following terms:
Sher Singh @ Partapa vs State Of Haryana on 9 January, 2015
22. Hon'ble the Apex Court in Sher Singh vs. State of Haryana reported in 2015 (1) SCALE 250, has further held as under:
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Surinder Singh vs State Of Haryana on 13 November, 2013
21. The word "soon before" appearing in Section 113-B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 also in Section 304-B I.P.C. have also been the subject matter of challenge in every case of dowry death. Hon'ble the Apex Court in Surinder Singh v. State of Haryana reported in (2014) 4 SCC 129, has again interpreted the said "soon before" as under:
Suresh Kumar Singla And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another on 2 April, 2013
Ashok Kumar vs. Stateof Haryana, (2010) 12 SCC 350 at pages 360-361; Bachni Devi & Anr. v. State of Haryana, (2011) 4 SCC 427 at 431, Pathan Hussain Basha v. State of A.P., (2012) 8 SCC 594 at 599, Kulwant Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, (2013) 4 SCC 177 at 184-185, Surinder Singh v. State of Haryana, (2014) 4 SCC 129 at 137, Raminder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 12 SCC 582 at 583, Suresh Singh v. State of Haryana, (2013) 16 SCC 353 at 361, Sher Singh v. State of Haryana, 2015 1 SCALE 250 at 262."
Kans Raj vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 26 April, 2000
In this connection we may refer to the judgment of this Court in Kans Raj v. State of Punjab, [(2000) 5 SCC 207 : 2000 SCC (Cri) 935] where this Court considered the term "soon before". The relevant observations are as under: (SCC pp. 222- 23, para 15) "15. ... 'Soon before' is a relative term which is required to be considered under specific circumstances of each case and no straitjacket formula can be laid down by fixing any time-limit. This expression is pregnant with the idea of proximity test. The term 'soon before' is not synonymous with the term 'immediately before' and is opposite of the expression 'soon after' as used and understood in Section 114, Illustration (a) of the Evidence Act. These words would imply that the interval should not be too long between the time of making the statement and the death. It contemplates the reasonable time which, as earlier noticed, has to be understood and determined under the peculiar circumstances of each case. In relation to dowry deaths, the circumstances showing the existence of cruelty or harassment to the deceased are not restricted to a particular instance but normally refer to a course of conduct. Such conduct may be spread over a period of time. If the cruelty or harassment or demand for dowry is shown to have persisted, it shall be deemed to be 'soon before death' if any other intervening circumstance showing the non-existence of such treatment is not brought on record, before such alleged treatment and the date of death. It does not, however, mean that such time can be stretched to any period. Proximate and live link between the effect of cruelty based on dowry demand and the consequential death is required to be proved by the prosecution. The demand of dowry, cruelty or harassment based upon such demand and the date of death should not be too remote in time which, under the circumstances, be treated as having become stale enough.