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

S.MURALIDHAR
Mukesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Delhi – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Mr. Atul Kumar and Mr. Binay Kumar Jha, Advocates
For the Respondent: Ms. Isha Khanna, APP

ORDER

S. Muralidhar, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 1st August 2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (‘ASJ’) in SC No. 62 of 2006 convicting Mukesh, Accused No.1 (‘A-1’) and Krishna, Accused No.3 (‘A-3’) [Appellants herein] for the offence under Section 498A/34 IPC and the order on sentence dated 5th August 2008 sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment (‘RI’) for 2 years and fine of Rs.5,000 each and in default to undergo RI for 2 months.

2. By the same judgment both accused were acquitted for the offence under Section 328/34 IPC and Ishwar, Accused No.2 (‘A-2’) was acquitted of all the offences.

THE CASE OF THE PROSECUTION

3. Sheela @ Sushila (PW-3) got married to A-1 on 12th November 2003. She and A-1 used to reside in the house of the maternal grandparents of A-1. Ishwar, (A-2) is the Mausa (maternal uncle) of A-1. In other words, Krishna (A-3), the mother of A-1 and the wife of A-2 were real sisters.

4. It was stated that although A-2 and A-3 used to reside separately they used to come to the maternal home at Inderlok and stay there for days together.

THE INVESTIGATION AND TRIAL

5. The starting point of the case was DD No. 1

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