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

2019 Supreme(Del) 1681

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Kaushal Kishore - Appellant
Vs.
State Nct Of Delhi - Respondent
Criminal Revision Petition No. 129 of 2018; Criminal Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2863 of 2018
Decided On : 28-05-2019

Advocates Appeared:
Harish Salve, Adv., S.A. Hashmi, Adv., Salman Hashmi, Adv., Sheezan Hashmi, Adv., Aditya P Khanna, Adv., Hirein Sharma, Adv.

The acquittal of a charge under Section 306 IPC does not automatically lead to acquittal under Section 498A IPC, and there must be sufficient material and cogent evidence to maintain a charge under Section 498A.

Headnote:

498A IPC - Cruelty - 498A IPC - 306 IPC - [Sections 306, 498A IPC] - The court discussed the provisions of Section 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and highlighted that the acquittal of a charge under Section 306 does not automatically lead to acquittal under Section 498A. The court emphasized that there must be sufficient material and cogent evidence to maintain a charge under Section 498A, and the degree of cruelty required for abetment under Section 306 is higher than that for an offence under Section 498A.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased married the petitioner and subsequently committed suicide. The petitioner was charged under Section 498A IPC, and the Trial Court found insufficient material to proceed under Section 306 IPC.

Finding of the Court:

The Trial Court framed charges under Section 498A IPC and discharged the accused for the offence under Section 306 IPC based on specific allegations of physical and mental cruelty against the petitioner.

Issues: The issues revolved around the nature of cruelty and the sufficiency of material to frame charges under Section 498A IPC despite the discharge under Section 306 IPC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the acquittal of a charge under Section 306 does not automatically lead to acquittal under Section 498A and highlighted the need for sufficient material and cogent evidence to maintain a charge under Section 498A.

Final Decision: The court found no infirmity in the Trial Court's decision to frame a charge against the petitioner for an offence under Section 498A IPC and dismissed the petition.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.

Petitioner impugns order on charge dated 27.10.2017 whereby charge has been framed against the petitioner under Section 498A Indian Penal Code (IPC for short).

2. Mr. Salve, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that Charge Sheet was filed both under Section 306 and Section 498A IPC, however, the Trial Court found insufficient material to proceed under Section 306 IPC. He submits that cruelty under Section 498A IPC is to be of such a nature which is likely to drive a woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury etc. and as the Trial Court found insufficient material to proceed under section 306 IPC, on the same analogy, there was insufficient material to even frame a charge under Section 498A of IPC.

3. Deceased married the petitioner on 27.09.2009. On 28.09.2010, the deceased committed suicide. FIR was registered on the complaint of the mother of the deceased, which complaint was lodged on 29.09.2010.

4. The allegations in the FIR are that the married life of her daughter with the petitioner was not good from day one. It is alleged that on the first day itself, petitioner had informed the deceased that his brother had four children and she had to take care of them. It is contended that the deceased initially did not inform her family about any problem but after six months, she started informing them that her husband had been mentally torturing her.

5. It is alleged that once at 1 AM in the night he had turned her out of the house and after a lot of requests, he permitted her to come back. It is alleged that on every occasion petitioner used to fight with her with regard to the children of his brother and used to blame her for any problem that they faced.

6. In her supplementary statement, recorded on 10.11.2010, the mother of the deceased stated that she was told by her daughter that her husband i.e. the petitioner did not want any child as he had stated that his brother had four children and she was to take care of them. It is contended that he never used to give her any money for expenditure. It is alleged that twice she became pregnant but both times she got the child aborted. Further, it is alleged that they had travelled to London where despite protest by the deceased, petitioner made her stay at her relative's house.

7. It is alleged that the deceased informed the mother that the petitioner wanted that all personal expenses of the deceased should be incurred by her brother and her brother should give money for purchasing a house in Gurgaon. It is alleged that she was being continuously mentally and physically tortured and beaten and was being pressurised to talk to her brother about getting money for purchasing a plot.

8. Statements of the brothers of the deceased Neeraj Mediratta and Anuj Mediratta were also recorded. They also stated that their sister the deceased was being harassed by the petitioner and one day he kept on shouting and fighting with her and at about 1 AM in the night he dragged her out of the house and asked her to go and get money from her mother and brothers and when she was asked about the reason for such behaviour, she stated that it was on account of the children of the brother of the petitioner. It is alleged that he used to continuously abuse her and had even made her apologize to him in writing several times and was looking for excuses to scold her and fight with her. It is alleged that when she had conceived, the petitioner physically and mentally started harassing her and would not get her medical check-up done, on account of which, she had miscarriage. They have contended that she committed suicide on account of the ill behaviour of the petitioner.

9. The deceased committed suicide on 28.09.2010, the very next day of her first marriage anniversary. As per the prosecution, a notebook was recovered from the spot and in the notebook, there w

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 Back to top