JITENDRA KUMAR
Md. Nausad Khan @ Md. Naushad Khan – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Jitendra Kumar, J. – The present petition, under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 04.12.2014, passed by Ld. Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad in Complaint Case No. 02 of 2014/ Trial No. 2229 of 2014/C.I.S. No. 7281 of 2014, whereby cognizance has been taken for offence punishable under Sections 498(A), 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against all the accused persons including the petitioners. The petitioners have also prayed for any other relief(s), which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The allegation, as per the complaint, is that the complainant, Nigar Naz (Respondent no.2 herein) was married with petitioner no.1, Md. Nausad Khan @ Md. Naushad Khan on 16.02.2012 as per Muslim rites and customs. There was demand of 2 lacs towards dowry at the time of marriage. However, marriage was somehow solemnized and thereafter, the complainant joined the matrimonial home of her husband. However, as per allegation, at matrimonial home, she was not treated like a bride on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry of 2 lacs and an Alto car. She was always t
G. Sagar Suri vs. State of U.P
Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam vs. State of Bihar
Abhishek vs. State of Madhya Pradesh.
Anand Kumar Mohatta vs. State (NCT of Delhi)
Joseph Salvaraj A. vs. State of Gujarat
Pepsi Foods Ltd. vs. Special Judicial Magistrate
Ashok Chaturvedi vs. Shitul H. Chanchani
Arun Shankar Shukla vs. State of U.P.
Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre
State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal
Smt. Nagawwa vs. Veeranna Shivalingappa Konujalgi
Pepsi Foods Ltd. vs. Special Judicial Magistrate
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. vs. Mohd. Sharaful Haque
State of Orissa vs. Saroj Kumar Sahoo
Indian Oil Corpn. vs. NEPC India Ltd.
Inder Mohan Goswami vs. State of Uttaranchal
Kailash Chandra Agrawal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Kans Raj vs. State of Punjab, Kans Raj vs. State of Punjab
Rajesh Sharma vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Vague and general allegations in dowry harassment cases do not constitute a prima facie case, necessitating specific allegations to prevent misuse of legal provisions.
Specific allegations are required to implicate family members in dowry-related criminal cases; general accusations without substantiation constitute an abuse of legal process.
The judgment established the need to scrutinize allegations in dowry harassment cases and prevent the abuse of process of the court, especially when vague and general accusations are made against the....
General and omnibus allegations of cruelty and dowry demands, without specific instances or details, do not constitute offenses under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC, and the court has the inherent ....
Vague and omnibus allegations in matrimonial disputes do not justify criminal proceedings against relatives; specific accusations are necessary to avoid misuse of legal provisions.
The court reinforced that for adding accused in dowry cases, specific allegations must be made; general accusations are insufficient to proceed.
The court established that vague allegations in dowry harassment cases do not warrant criminal proceedings against relatives, emphasizing the need for specific accusations.
The importance of specific allegations in cases of matrimonial disputes and the caution against the misuse of Sec. 498-A IPC.
The court established that the addition of accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. requires a prima facie case, and the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can prevent abuse of process.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.