U.B.SAHA
State of Tripura – Appellant
Versus
Milan Debnath – Respondent
The State appellant has preferred the instant appeal against the judgment dated 04.01.2014 passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur in Case No. ST 66 (ST/U) of 2013 whereby and where under the respondents were acquitted from the charges leveled against them under Section 498A/306 IPC.
2. Heard Ms S Deb Gupta, learned counsel for the State appellant as well as Mr. Sekhar Dutta, learned counsel for the respondents.
3. Brief facts of the case is that the complainant’s daughter namely, Tulsi Debnath (now deceased) was married with the accused, namely, Milan Debnath as per the Hindu rites and customs. After four/five months of the marriage the accused persons, namely, Shri Milan Debnath and Shri Nimai Debnath, being the husband and relative of the husband of Tulsi Debnath subjected her to cruelty both by physically and mentally torturing upon her and also demanding ornaments, TV, cash money. Both the accused persons namely, Shri Milan Debnath and Shri Nimai Debnath, respondents herein, lastly on 20.07.2010 abetted her to commit suicide by way of physical and mental torture.
4. On the basis of the complaint lodged by PW 1, Sri Lalit Mohan Debnath, fat
Aher Raja Khima v. State of Saurashtra (AIR 1956 SC 217)
Balbir Singh v. State of Punjab
Girdhar Shankar Tawade vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2002) 5 SCC 177
Khedu Mohton v. State of Bihar
M.G. Agarwal V. State of Maharashtra
Madan Mohan Singh v. State of U.P.
Noor Khan v. State of Rajasthan
S. Rama Krishna Vs. S. Rami Reddy, (Deceased by LRs)
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.