Complainants in dowry cases tend to get vindictive : P & H High court !!

Complainants in dowry cases tend to get vindictive, says HC

Saurabh Malik | Tribune News Service | Chandigarh, May 30, 2015

In a judgment that would go a long way in saving husband and his relatives from the rigour of anti-dowry laws, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recapped that complainant-wife in marital dispute cases has a propensity to rope in more and more persons as accused with a sense of vendetta.

“The court is conscious of the fact that complainants in such matters have a tendency to aggravate the magnitude of allegations and to enlarge the array of accused persons, driven by a sense of vendetta,” Justice Mahesh Grover asserted.

The assertion came during the hearing of a petition filed by Charanjeet Singh against the State of Haryana and another respondent. He was seeking directions for quashing an FIR registered on March 16, 2013, for subjecting a married woman to harassment and other offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504 and 34 of the IPC in Ambala.

The petitioner was the complainant-wife’s brother-in-law. Taking up the matter, Justice Grover asserted that a perusal of the FIR revealed that the only allegation against the petitioner was instigating the complainant’s husband against her over the telephone.

Justice Grover added: “It transpires that general allegations have been levelled against the petitioner without there being any specific material in this regard.”

Source

http://www.tribuneindia.com / news

*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases

regards

Vinayak

Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn’t given up, Male, activist

can I be arrested B4 the case goes to court ?

I’m really saddened by young Indian men asking me “… Can I be arrested by the police .., can my parents be arrested ..?” “..There has been NO DUE PROCESS , no opportunity for me to legally defend myself, and can I be arrested even at that preliminary stage? ”

Then I ask them are they “..married ? ”

Married men and their parents can be arrested anytime anywhere just on the words of the wife … right ?

*********************

Thanks for valuable comments on social media, I add the following caveat to the statement above

1. Wherever possible, go with SIF friends / trustworthy friends when going to police station or a CAW cell or for mediation centers in matrimonial disputes

2. Be polite. Both you and your companions have to be completely polite and respectful of the police. Do not raise ur voice even if opposite side raises their voice. Be calm. Nothing gets decided on that day, so stay calm even if opposite side tries to instigate you.

3. Tell them you are innocent & ready to fight. This is important. Your fear is the opponents weapon / strength. Your mental strength and calm attitude will make them retreat.

4. Keep CRPC 41a notifications and Arneesh Kumar judgements handy (search this blog for references to Arneesh Kumar case). This is to be used, just in case the fear of arrest is dangled. Even then be polite and courteous.

5. Network ….. Network …. Network with other married men hit with cases … Attend police stations with them to know the situations , to observe and help … That will help u greatly in your fight

6. Do not expect ANY mercy just because you are innocent or because you are a husband !!! Husbands are considered @$$holes unless proven otherwise

*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases

regards

Vinayak

Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn’t given up, Male, activist

should we rejoice or should we mourn politicos hit by DV and dowry cases ??

Ex wife alleges a politico tried to kill her !! case is filed and the politico resigns his post. This is another chapter in the sad saga of careers lost, years of hard work lost in India, in the name of women’s appeasement

In this cacse the charges are NOT yet proven.

In many such cases it comes to light that the charges are false and motivated by anger or greed

Still men loose money, career and name. Society looses the support and services of honest men

While I write all this, I’m left with a quandy

I’m unable to decide for myself, IF I should mourn politicos caught in their own trap ??

The congress and communists have been in the forefront of women appeasement

they have enacted and supported every law possible to milk men, to bleed men, to arrest and defame men and thier families

Now one of them is caught in their own trap

What should our response be ??

Readers, brothers, YOU decide !

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news from the web>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Former wife accuses T Siddique of murder bid (and later he steps down from KPCC post!)

Thursday, May 21, 2015 11:41 hrs IST

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

T. Siddique

Kozhikode: KPCC general secretary T. Siddique’s former wife, Nazeema, has accused that he tried to murder her.

Nazeema filed a complaint with Kozhikode police commissioner against the Congress leader. In her complaint, she said that Siddique and his aides manhandled and threatened to kill her at a hospital here when she went there for treatment.

The Kozhikode First Class Judicial Magistrate court had the other day registered a complaint against Siddique on charges of domestic violence on a complaint filed by Nazeema.

Source

http://english.manoramaonline.com/news/kerala

*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases

regards

Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn’t given up, Male, activist

Drug addict Abla dies of overdose and they want hubby to B hanged!!

Drug addict Abla habituated to marijuana injections and paracetamol overdoes eats a strip of pills and dies at a premier hospital even after best treatment

However the ablaas father wants the husband changed with murder

Who will save men from ( such ) men ??

>>>>>>> case from Indian kanoon site !! >>>>>>>>

Delhi High Court
Anil Kumar Aggarwal vs Govt. Of Nct & Anr. on 18 May, 2015

Author: Sunil Gaur

I- 29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: May 18, 2015 + CRL.M.C. 2076/2015 & Crl. M.A.No.7386/2015 ANIL KUMAR AGGARWAL ... Petitioner Through: Mr. K. S. Negi, Advocate versus GOVT OF NCT & ANR. ... Respondents Through: Mr. Parveen Bhati, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR JUDGMENT 

% (ORAL)

Petitioner had filed a criminal complaint for the offence of murder etc. regarding untimely death of his daughter- Priyanka Kumari, who was married to the accused just a year back prior to unfortunate death of petitioner’s daughter. After recording the pre-summoning evidence, petitioner’s complaint has been dismissed by the trial court by holding that there is no incriminating material on record to justify summoning of the accused. The aforesaid order of 2nd August, 2014 of the learned trial court has been affirmed by the learned Revisional Court vide impugned order of 17th November, 2014.

According to the complainant, the factual background of this case, as noticed in the impugned order of 17th November, 2014 of the learned Crl. M.C.No.2076/2015 Page 1 Revisional Court is as under:-

„According to the complainant, his daughter was married to Ranjit Kumar Aggarwal (respondent) on 26.06.2009. She died on 29.09.2010. The respondent/accused demanded Rs.4 lacs at the time of said marriage, in addition to other house hold articles. Said amount was also paid to him. After marriage, couples started residing together. In May, 2010 respondent further demanded a sum of Rs.5 lacs to purchase a car. He (complainant) did not take it seriously and ignored. Ranjit Kumar Aggarwal (respondent) joined Jindal Group of Companies, having office at Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi. His daughter was thus went to Delhi. Although, the victim had some trivial complaints against her husband but same were ignored by him to save her matrimonial life. All of sudden on 25.09.2010, respondent/accused called his (complainant‟s) wife and asked them to come to Delhi. He came to Delhi. He was asked to reach Mohinder Hospital, Green Park, New Delhi.

After coming here, he (complainant) found his daughter semiconscious and unable to speak. It was disclosed to him that she (daughter of complainant) had some gastro problem and loose motion etc. Respondent/accused started requesting doctors to discharge the victim and due to his persistent requests, she was discharged from the hospital. When the victim was taken to her matrimonial house by respondent/accused, complainant was informed that she was serious and taken to Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj. He was asked to wait outside the hospital. In this hospital, the victim Priyanka was declared dead on 29.09.2010 at 11.50 am.

The five circumstances, which weighed with the courts below in dismissing petitioner’s complaint at the summoning stage, are as under:-

„(i) There was no previous complaint lodged by the victim or her parents to the police or any other authority like CAW Cell etc. alleging demand of dowry or the domestic violence committed on her.

(ii) There was evidence on record to verify that after falling ill the victim was given treatment in best hospitals including Mohinder Hospital, Green Park and Fortis Hospital, Vasant Kunj. She was given immediate treatment and there was no delay in taking her to hospital by the accused.

(iii) The deceased had history of taking poison twice. She was a case of drug abuse.

(iv) According to post mortem report, the victim died due to Panrieatitis. The patient was opined as having consumed strip of Paracetamol. She was admitted to Mohinder Hospital for diarrhea and later on shifted to Fortis Hospital. According to death summery, the deceased was habitual of intravenous drug abuse in marijuana and was patient of depression. She was also a chain smoker.

(v) A per forensic report given by Safdarjung Hospital, the death of the said victim was due to hemorrhagic Panrieatitis.

Immediately before death of his daughter i.e. victim, the complainant gave statement before the Executive magistrate mentioning that the relation of accused and his daughter were cordial. Both of them used to live happily and peacefully. His daughter died due to disease and no one should be made responsible for it. Maternal grandfather of deceased was also examined by the Executive magistrate. This witness also stated that they had no complaint against anybody and the victim died due to disease.‟ (underlined to supply emphasis) At the hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the impugned order erroneously proceeds on the ground that there is no incriminating material against the accused persons and the pre- summoning evidence of petitioner as well as grandfather of deceased clearly makes out an offence of murder against the accused persons and so, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and accused persons ought to be tried in accordance with the law.

Upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned order and the material on record, I find that in the pre-summoning evidence of petitioner and the grandfather (nana) of the deceased, the fact of deceased earlier trying to take her life is no where questioned and nothing material has come in pre-summoning evidence regarding alleged cruelty being meted out to the deceased to come to a conclusion that grave doubt exists regarding the involvement of accused persons in causing the death of deceased.

The Apex Court in State of Orissa v. Ujjal Kumar Burdhan (2012) 4 SCC 547 has reiterated that inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. are to be exercised in exceptional cases. Pertinent observations of the Apex Court in Ujjal Kumar (supra) on this aspect are as under: –

"It is true that the inherent powers vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Code are very wide. Nevertheless, inherent powers do not confer arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act according to whims or caprice. This extraordinary power has to be exercised sparingly with circumspection and as far as possible, for extraordinary cases, where allegations in the complaint or the first information report, taken on its face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute the offence alleged. It needs little emphasis that unless a case of gross abuse of power is made out against those in charge of investigation, the High Court should be loath to interfere at the early/premature stage of investigation."

In the instant case, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no palpable error in the impugned order to justify interference by this Court.

This petition and application are accordingly dismissed.

 (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MAY 18, 2015 r Crl. M.C.No.2076/2015 

Mr. Gulam !, repeatedly appear in court again & again + wife should say you are OK !!

Mr. Gulam !, repeatedly appear in court again & again + wife should say you are OK !!

"…That the petitioner is husband and he is ready to keep his wife."
"… he shall take his wife/complainant with him to his house and keep her with all respect and dignity that a wife would deserve …"
"…That on completion of period of two months of the provisional bail of the petitioner, he again with his wife/complainant shall surrender before the court below and if, …"
"…That on completion of period of four months, the petitioner and the complainant shall again surrender before the court below and if this time, the court below also find that the complainant had no further complaint against the petitioner and/or his family member, …"
"…That both the bailors will be close family relatives of the petitioners, who will undertake an affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioner. …"

Still MEN WANT TO GET MARRIED !!!

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.47200 of 2014
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -657 Year- 2013 Thana –
AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- AURANGABAD

******************************************************
Sujeet Kumar Mehta @ Sujit Kumar Mehta S/o Kameshwar resident of
village- Jogi Bigaha, P.S.- Jamhore, District- Aurangabad …. …. Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar
2. Sushma Devi W/o Sujeet Kumar Mehta D/o Jagdish Mehta Resident of
village- Salampur (Amauna), P.O.- Sudargani, P.S.- Risiup, District-
Auranagabad …. …. Opposite Party/s

******************************************************
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Leelawati Kumari, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Suman Kumari Singh (App)
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
******************************************************

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA

ORAL ORDER

2

14-05-2015

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the nature of allegation against the petitioner for offence under Sections 323, 379 & 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and that the learned counsel for the petitioner, on the basis of the statement made in paragraph-8 reading as follows:

" That the petitioner is husband and he is ready to keep his wife."

has submitted that the petitioner has prepared to not only keep the complainant as wife with due respect and dignity but also this Court would find from the order of the learned Sessions Judge dated 07.11.2014 that even the complainant was desirous of living with the petitioner by way of restoring of her conjugal life, this Court would direct that if the petitioner, namely, Sujeet Kumar Mehta @ Sujit Kumar Mehta surrenders on 08th June 2015 before the court below, the court below, on hearing the complainant as also her learned counsel, shall pass an order granting provisional bail to the petitioner for a period of two months, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in connection with Complaint Case No. 657 of 2013, subject to the following conditions:

(i) That the petitioner immediately after being granted provisional bail for a period of two months, he shall take his wife/complainant with him to his house and keep her with all respect and dignity that a wife would deserve in the hands of the husband and his family members.

(ii) That on completion of period of two months of the provisional bail of the petitioner, he again with his wife/complainant shall surrender before the court below and if, on query being made from the complainant, it is found by the court below that the complainant was not given any sort of physical or mental torture by her husband/petitioner as well as his family members, such provisional bail of the petitioner shall be again extended for a period of four months.

(iii) That it goes without saying that if the court below, on the other hand, from the statement of the complainant, finds that in the period of two months, she was badly treated by the petitioner and his family members, the provisional bail granted to the petitioner shall be cancelled and he shall be taken into custody.

(iv) That on completion of period of four months, the petitioner and the complainant shall again surrender before the court below and if this time, the court below also find that the complainant had no further complaint against the petitioner and/or his family member, the provisional bail of the petitioner shall be confirmed. It is again made it clear that if at this stage also, the complainant makes out any allegation of torture or misbehaviour by the petitioner/husband and/or his family members, his provisional bail shall come to an end and he will be taken to custody. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

(v) That both the bailors will be close family relatives of the petitioners, who will undertake an affidavit giving genealogy as to how they are related with the petitioner. The bailors will also undertake to inform the court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.

(vi) That the affidavit shall clearly state that the petitioner is not accused in any other case and if he is, he shall not be released on bail.

(vii) That the bailors shall also state on affidavit that they will inform the court concerned, if the petitioner is implicated in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of his bail on the ground of misuse.

(viii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each and every date in course of trial and if his fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail will be liable to be cancelled on this ground alone.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J)

Sujit/-

U

*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases

regards

Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn’t given up, Male, activist