Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.42 seconds)The Indian Penal Code, 1860
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 3 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 4 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Mahesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 7 August, 2019
30. This settled proposition of law was once
again reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Mahesh Kumar Vs. State of Haryana (surpa) and
again referred its decision in Hira Lal and Others Vs.
State (Government of NCT), Delhi4 and held that
unless the prosecution proves demand for dowry and
cruelty to the deceased soon before the death in
connection with such demand for dowry, the essential
ingredients of the offence under Section 304B of IPC are
4
(2003) 8 SC 80
28
not proved and it is also held that when the prosecution
has failed to prove the initial ingredients to invoke
Section 113B of the Evidence Act, the said presumption
cannot be invoked.
Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Sri. P. Thimmaiah @ Thimmabovi vs The State Of Karnataka on 10 April, 2018
28. This Court in Ranganatha S/o
Thimmabovi Vs. State of Karnataka (supra) held in
para 15 and 16 as under:-
Section 313 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Hira Lal And Ors vs State (Govt. Of Nct) Delhi on 25 July, 2003
30. This settled proposition of law was once
again reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Mahesh Kumar Vs. State of Haryana (surpa) and
again referred its decision in Hira Lal and Others Vs.
State (Government of NCT), Delhi4 and held that
unless the prosecution proves demand for dowry and
cruelty to the deceased soon before the death in
connection with such demand for dowry, the essential
ingredients of the offence under Section 304B of IPC are
4
(2003) 8 SC 80
28
not proved and it is also held that when the prosecution
has failed to prove the initial ingredients to invoke
Section 113B of the Evidence Act, the said presumption
cannot be invoked.