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

2006 Supreme(Jhk) 14

N.DHINAKAR, M.Y.EQBAL
Uday Kumar Mehta – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent


ORDER

1. The appellant, Uday Kumar Mehta, was tried along with two others, Butu Mahato and Turani Devi, who are his parents. The appellant and other two accused were charged for the offence under Section 302, 201, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The trial Judge, while acquitting Butu Mahato and Turani Devi, found the appellant alone guilty for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment, while acquitted him of the other charges. The present appeal is against the said conviction and sentence.

2. The facts are the appellant is the husband of Madhuri Devi and married Madhuri Devi in the year 1987. It is the case of the prosecution that along with the appellant, the deceased Madhuri Devi and his parents, Butu Mahato and Turani Devi, were also living and Madhuri Devi, the deceased, after leaving her matrimonial house, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Civil Court, Garhwa, seeking maintenance from the appellant and that later, a compromise petition was filed before the Civil Court and that thereafter, the dece












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