Back
HARPREET SINGH BRAR
State of Haryana – Appellant
Versus
Rani Devi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.
CRM-31806-2015 and CRM-31791-2015
Both the applications seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeals are allowed and delay of 21 days and 58 days respectively, is condoned.
CRM-A-1616-MA-2015 and CRA-AS-100-2015
1. The present appeals are preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 30.04.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Court, Kurukshetra in FIR No. 7 dated 12.01.2012 under Section 306 IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Thanesar.
2. This common order shall dispose of both CRM-A-1616-MA-2015 and CRA-AS-100-2015 as they arise from the same factual background. For the sake of brevity, the facts are taken from CRM-A-1616-MA-2105.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
3. The facts, in brief, are that respondent-accused Rani Devi moved a complaint under Section 406, 420, 506 IPC before the police against Jagan Nath(deceased), father of the appellant-complainant Anil Kumar for recovery of an amount of Rs 6, 30,000/-. Panchayat was convened to resolve the dispute where Jagan Nath denied having borrowed such amount. The panchayat was scheduled to reconvene on 12.01.2012. On that day, Jagan Nath went for a walk at around 7-8 AM but did not return. The ap
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of mens rea and active instigation in abetment of suicide cases, and the parameters for the power of the Appellate Court while deal....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for evidence of instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aid on the part of the accused to establish the offence of abetment under S....
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
