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

2013 Supreme(SC) 228

A.K.PATNAIK, SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
MODINSAB KASIMSAB KANCHAGAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


JUDGMENT

A.K. Patnaik J.:-This is an appeal against the judgment dated 11th September, 2006 of the Karnataka High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 805 of 2006.


2. The facts verybriefly are: 2.1 The appellant was married to Rajbee on 21st April, 1997. She committed suicide on 29th March, 1998. A case was registered and investigated by the Police Inspector [Anti-Dowry Cell] and charge sheet was filed against the appellant and the mother of the appellant for offences under Sections 498A and 304B read with Section 34 IPC as well as Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act read with Section 34 of IPC. 2.2 The prosecution case was that at the time of marriage of the appellant with Rajbee(the deceased), `1,000/- cash and one tola of gold was given to the appellant and thereafter the appellant harassed the deceased further for more dowry of `10,000/- and the deceased informed about this harassment to her mother. Thereafter, the mother of the deceased was able to give `2000/- towards the demand but was unable to pay the balance amount of `8000/-. The deceased came along with the appellant to her mother's place and when the appellant was told that her family does not have any capacity t














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