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

S.SAGHIR AHMAD, M.K.MUKHERJEE
Madhu Bala – Appellant
Versus
Suresh Kumar – Respondent


JUDGMENT

M.K. Mukherjee, J.-Special leave granted. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. On February 18, 1988 the appellant filed a complaint against the three respondents, who are her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra alleging commission of offences under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code I.P.C. for short by them. On that complaint, the learned Magistrate passed an order under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code' for short) directing the police to register a case and investigate into the same. Pursuant to the said direction Thaneswar Police Station registered a case being FIR No. 61 of 1988 and on completion of investigation submitted charge sheet (police report) against the three respondents under Sections 498A and 406 I.P.C. The learned Magistrate took cognizance upon the said charge-sheet and thereafter framed charge against the three respondents under Section 406 I.P.C. only as, according to the learned.

Magistrate, the offence under Section 498A I.P.C. was allegedly committed in the district of Kamal. Against the framing of the charge the respondents moved the Sessi

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