Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.19 seconds)Section 2 in The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 304B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 498 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Sham Lal vs State Of Haryana Etc on 20 February, 1997
In support of his contention learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Sham Lal v. The State of Haryana, 1997 (3) RCR 85 :1997 (2) All India Criminal Law Reporter 393 (SC)=I (1997) CCR 231 (SC). This submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner can again be turned down with a short reason. It is settled principle of law that while deciding the bail application, the assertions of the complainant party are supposed to be assessed. At this juncture, I cannot assess the evidence which is to be led by the prosecution in the Trial Court. If the alleged demand of Rs. 50,000/- was being repeated till the date of the death of the deceased, certainly such demand would come soon before the death of the deceased. The allegations of the prosecution are very clear, which prima facie establish that the deceased was harassed and coerced by the petitioner and his co-accused in order to bring Rs. 50,000/- and on account of this coercion, the deceased had committed suicide by drenching herself in kerosene. Admittedly, Smt. Manjit Kaur had died under abnormal circumstances within 83 days of her marriage, in the house of her in-laws inviting prima facie presumption under Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act.
Section 439 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 306 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Smt. Shanti And Ors. vs State Of Haryana Through Collector And ... on 8 August, 1994
11. Learned Counsel for the petitioner then placed reliance upon Shanti and Ors. v. The State of Haryana, 1991 (2) RCR 55=I (1991) DMC 187; SHANKARPARSAD V. THE STATE, 1991 (2) RCR 165; and Baljit Singh v. The State (UT), 1996 (2) RCR 86 :1996 (2) All India Criminal Law Reporter 782=III (1996) CCR 73 (DB) (Pb. & Hry.), in order to convince this Court that presumption of Section 113-B of the Indian Evidence Act would apply only if it is established prima facie that soon before the death, the deceased was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand of dowry.
1