H.C.MISHRA
Manoj Yadav @ Manoj Kr. Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Since both these applications arise of the same case, they are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsels for the State as also learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2.
3. The petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings against them in Gomia P.S. Case No. 107 of 2006 corresponding to G.R. No. 889 of 2006, which was instituted for the offence under Sections 498-A / 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 / 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Petitioners have also prayed for quashing the orders dated 9.4.2007 and 26.7.2007 taking cognizance in the respective cases, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat.
4. The FIR was lodged on the basis of the complaint case, filed by the complainant O.P. No. 2 in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat. The complainant is the wife of petitioner Manoj Yadav and the other petitioners are the in-laws of the complainant. It is stated in the complaint petition that the marriage between the parties was held on 28th of May, 2004 and thereafter she was brought to her matrimo
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.