Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 34 (0.31 seconds)Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 307 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
Section 4 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Varala Bharath Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 5 September, 2017
Whereas, in Varala Bharath Kumar and
another Vs. State of Telangana and another (stated 6 supra),
the Apex Court had an occasion to deal with an identical
issue, where allegations were made in the FIR/the complaint
or the outcome of investigation as found in the charge sheet,
even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their
entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out
the case against the accused; where the allegations do not
14
2018(30 L.S.31(SC)
MSM,J
26 Crl.P.Nos.7652 of 2017
And 9774 of 2017
disclose the ingredients of the offence alleged; where the
uncontroverted allegations made in the first information
report or complaint and the material collected in support of
the same do not disclose the commission of offence alleged
and make out a case against the accused; the court can
exercise power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
or under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure may
be exercised. The records at hand could not disclose any
willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive
the complainant to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or
danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of
the complainant. So also, there is nothing on record to show
that there was a demand of dowry by the appellants or any of
their relatives, either prior to the marriage, during the
marriage or after the marriage. The record also does not
disclose anywhere that the husband of the complainant
acted, with a view to coerce her or any person related to her
to meet any unlawful demand of any property or valuable
security. In the absence of specific allegations, the Court
cannot encourage the parties to harass the husband or the
relative of the husband of a woman by lodging criminal
complaints implicating them into grave criminal offences.
Preeti Gupta & Anr vs State Of Jharkhand & Anr on 13 August, 2010
In Preeti Gupta and another Vs. State of Jharkhand
and another (referred supra) the Apex Court on an occasion
deal with similar circumstances and high lighted the powers
of the Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The facts of the case
are that A1 is a permanent resident of Navasari, Surat,
Gujarat and has been living with her husband for more than
seven years. Similarly, A2 is a permanent resident of
goregaon, Maharashtra. They have never visited the place
where the alleged incident had taken place and they never
lived with the second respondent and her husband and
thereby, their implication in the complaint is meant to harass
and humiliate the husband's relatives. This seems to be the
only basis to file the complaint against the appellants.
Permitting the complainant to pursue the complaint would be
an abuse of process of Court and the Court further observed
that when the complaint was filed with an oblique motive and
13
(2016) 3 SCC 724
MSM,J
23 Crl.P.Nos.7652 of 2017
And 9774 of 2017
at the same time, rapid increase in the number of genuine
cases of dowry harassment is also a matter of serious
concern. When the accused were living at a different place,
their implication and consequences are not properly
visualized by the complainant that such complaint can lead
to insurmountable harassment, agony and pain to the
complainant, accused and his close relations.