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

1997 Supreme(MP) 608

S.K.KULSHRESTHA
Shravan Kumar Sonkar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S.K. Kulshrestha, J.

1. In this petition, the petitioners have prayed that the investigation of offence pertaining to Crime No. 23 of 1996 registered at Mahila Police Station, Jabalpur, be quashed as the F.I.R. in respect of this investigation does not disclose commission of any cognizable offence. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has urged that the marriage between the petitioner No. 1 Shravan Kumar Sonkar and the respondent No. 4 Smt. Saroj Sonkar stood dissolved by a decree of divorce passed on 16.5.1995 and since a bare perusal of the F.I.R. (Annexure R-I) and the return of the respondents 1,2,3 and 4 indicates that the commission of the offence has been alleged between 15.1.1996 and 17.6.1996, this period being subsequent to the decree of divorce, no offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code can be said to have been made out, as it requires existence of relationship of husband and wife. The learned Counsel has invited attention to the contents of the F.I.R. (AnnexureR-I) to point out that even though the case has also been registered under Section 406, I.P.C, the ingredients of the said provision are not made out, as there is no allegation of any mis-ap

















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