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

2017 Supreme(All) 1271

ANIRUDDHA SINGH
JAYANTI PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Anil Srivastava and Anil Kumar Verma for the Applicants; A.G.A. for the Opposite Parties.

JUDGMENT :

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh, J.

1. Heard Sri Anil Srivastava, learned counsel for the revisionists and the learned AGA for the State.

2. This revision has been filed by revisionists namely Jayanti Prasad, Rajesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Smt. Mando Devi, Virendra Kumar Gupta and Smt. Bhama @ Manjoo against order dated 1.9.1997 passed by Sri Anil Kumar, Judicial Magistrate III, Bareilly in Criminal Case No. 414 of 1997 (State vs. Anil Kumar Gupta and Others), Crime No. 297/93 under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Fatehganj East, District Bareilly whereby charges have been framed against revisionists and Anil Kumar Gupta, husband of opposite party No. 2/informant.

3. Opposite party No. 2/informant lodged an FIR dated 10.12.1993 stating therein that marriage of opposite party no. 2/informant was solemnized with accused Anil Kumar Gupta, son of revisionist No. 1 Jayanti Prasad on 4.5.1992. Revisionists demanded Rs. 40,000/- scooter and Maruti as dowry in second Bidai. Her husband had gone back to Fatehganj on 3.12.1993. On 5.12.1993 her father-in-law took her from Bareilly to Fatehganj. On the next day, above revisionists and her husband beat her























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