SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(SC) 705

MARKANDEY KATJU, CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD
Sudarshan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 12th May, 2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 71-SB of 1992.

3. The facts have been set out in the impugned judgment and hence we are not repeating the same here except wherever necessary.

4. The appellant was married to one Sudesh who is said to have committed suicide on 23rd February, 1989. According to the prosecution Sudesh was married to the appellant in April/May, 1980 but she could not conceive. The appellant had been maltreating and beating Sudesh and saying that if she dies, he will be re-married. She was physically assaulted and sent to her father’s house where she stayed for one and half years but due to the intervention of the panchayat members and the promise of the appellant that he would not harass her again and his request for pardon, she came back. However, it appears that she was again harassed and tormented and ultimately driven to suicide.

5. The appellant was convicted by the trial Court for abetting the suicide under Section 306 IPC, and his conviction was upheld by the High Court and he w






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top