SUBHASH CHAND
Arjun Kumar Sao @ Arjun Kumar Saw @ Arjun Saw – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 are present.
2. Heard the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
3. This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated 17.02.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, F.T.C. (C.A.W), Bermo at Tenughat in Sessions Trial Case No. 84 of 2021 and Sessions Trial Case No.77 of 2022 arising out of Nawadih P.S. Case No.101 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1562 of 2020 under sections 341, 323, 307, 498A & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act whereby and whereunder the application of the petitioner under section 227 of Cr.PC for discharge had been rejected.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the FIR, the allegations are made in regard to subjecting the victim to cruelty for demand of dowry and the two incidents are given in regard to the allegations that the murder was attempted on victim. One incident is on the occasion of Durgapuja in her matrimonial house she was beaten and the attempt was made to set her ablaze wherein her rig
State of Maharashtra v. Balram Bama Patil and others reported in (1983) 2 SCC 28
Palwinder Singh vrs. Balwinder singh
State of Orissa v. Debendra Nath Padhi (2005) 1 SCC 568 : 2005 SCC(Cri) 415
Sanghi Brothers (Indore) Pvt. Ltd. vrs. Sanjay Choudhary & Ors. (2008) 10 SCC 681
State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy (1977) 2 SCC 699 : 1977 SCC(Cri) 404
Stree Atyachar Virodhi Parishad v. Dilip Nathumal Chordia (1989) 1 SCC 715 : 1989 SCC(Cri) 285
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.