Back
ANANDA KUMAR MUKHERJEE
Malancha Mohinta – Appellant
Versus
Dipak Mohinta – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ananda Kumar Mukherjee, J. - This revisional application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is a fall out of a matrimonial discord between the petitioner and the opposite party. The petitioner/wife by filling this application under section 482 has sought for quashing of the proceeding in Case No. AC 968 of 2009 (TR No. 225 of 2009) under section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, filed by the opposite party against the petitioner, now pending before learned Judicial Magistrate 9th Court, Alipore, South 24 Parganas.
2. A synoptical resume of petitioner's case is that, the petitioner got married to the opposite party on 29.11.1990 according to Hindu Rights and Customs. Soon after the marriage the opposite party subjected the petitioner to physical and mental torture on the demand of dowry from her paternal house. On 15.11.1994 petitioner gave birth to a female child. She made constant effort to adjust with the opposite party to maintain a peaceful conjugal life but the opposite party continued to torture her and on 25.04.1997 the petitioner along with her minor child were driven out from her matrimonial home on being abused and assaulted by the opposite party
The proceeding is barred by limitation and the exceptions to section 499 of the IPC apply.
Where part of overt acts, or at least one instance among overt acts alleged to be committed in India, sanction under Section 188 of Cr.P.C. is not necessary in such cases.
Cognizance of offence – Cognizance’ ought to be taken within specified period from commission of offence but complainant should not be put to prejudice, if for reasons beyond control of prosecuting a....
Cognizance of offences under Section 498A IPC is barred by limitation if allegations are not continuous; sanction under Section 188 Cr.P.C. is required only if the offence is committed entirely outsi....
The offence under Section 498-A IPC is a continuing offence, allowing limitation to commence from the last act of cruelty, and can be extended in the interest of justice.
The limitation for prosecuting under Section 498-A IPC starts from the last act of cruelty, and vague allegations against in-laws do not justify prosecution.
Point of Law : Language of Section 468(3) makes it imperative that the limitation provided for taking cognizance is in respect of the offence charged and not in respect of offence finally proved.
Complaint filed by the respondent No.2 would be barred by Section 300 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code being successive prosecution as for the very set of allegations, earlier complaint filed by th....
The Court reiterated that the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC should be exercised sparingly, carefully and with great caution, and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specifically....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
