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

2022 Supreme(MP) 285

RAJENDRA KUMAR VERMA
Laxman – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Omprakash Solanki for petitioner; Hemant Sharma, Government Advocate, for respondent No. 1/State; Anupam Chouhan for respondent No. 2

ORDER

1. They are heard.

2. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under section 482 of Cr.P.C.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on the FIR lodged by the respondent No.2 bearing Crime No.50/2016, an offence under section 498-A of IPC has been registered against the petitioner at Police Station - Tirla, District - Dhar.

4. After due investigation, charge-sheet has been filed and charge under section 498-A of IPC is framed against the petitioner by the trial Court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.2 is not a legally wedded wife of the petitioner. There is specific finding of this Court in Criminal Revision No.3416/2018 passed vide order dated 11.12.2018 regarding it and when the respondent No.2 is not a legally wedded wife then section 498-A of IPC is not attracted. He further submits that in absence of valid marriage, Section 498-A of IPC does not come into operation. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State v. Prasanna Kumar Senapati (2007 Cri.L.J.1344) of Orissa High Court and Rajiv Thapar & Ors. v. Madan Lal Kapoor [AIR 2013 SC (Supp) 1056.

6. Learned counsel for the State as well as counsel for the res

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