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

2012 Supreme(All) 2077

SUNIL HALI
UMESH @ BANTI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
V.P. Gupta for the Applicants; A.G.A. for the Opposite Parties.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sunil Hali, J.—Process under Sections 498-A, 452. 323. 506 IPC & Section 3/4 D.P.Act has been issued against the applicants in Criminal Complaint Case No. 2248 of 2010. The applicants filed an application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate seeking discharge from the trial. The Magistrate while considering the application recorded that the application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. is not maintainable. After perusing the record, summons have been issued and application under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. has been rejected.

2. The allegations leveled against the applicants in the complaint are that opposite party No. 2 is married to applicant No. 1 and applicant Nos. 2 and 3 are her mother-in-law and brother-in-law respectively. Ever since the inception of marriage, the opposite party No. 2 was harassed by the applicants’ family by demanding more dowry. It is also alleged that opposite party No. 2 was thrown out of the house as she failed to fulfill the dowry demand of the applicants by not bringing a motorcycle and Rs. 50,000/- in cash. It is further alleged that on 12.5.2010, the applicants came to the parental house of opposite party No. 2 and demanded dowr









































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