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

H.N.NARAYAN
Sumangala – Appellant
Versus
Laxminarayan Anant Hegde – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioner:Sri S.R. Hegde Hudlamane, Advocate.

Order

H.N. Narayan, J.— Heard Sri S.R. Hegde Hudlamane, learned Counsel

for the petitioner and perused the impugned judgment.

2. The short question which falls for consideration in this revision is—

Whether the act of husband taking away his minor child without con-sent or knowledge of the mother, i.e., his wife amounts to cruelty to the mother under section 498-A of the IPC?

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Vijay Kumar Sharma and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh1. After considering this question, the Allahabad High Court Held as follows:—

“We are of the view that taking away the son of Smt. Savita Sharma by the petitioners in this case without information to Smt. Savita Sharma of the said fact amounts to cruelty inasmuch as by the said conduct of the petitioners it could be much possible that Smt. Savita Sharma could either be driven to commit suicide or it could cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman. We also find that the said conduct of the petitioners if proved, amounted to cruelty vide explanation (b) to Section 498-A,

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