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

1994 Supreme(SC) 532

M.K.MUKHERJEE, S.C.AGRAWAL
Minakshi Bala – Appellant
Versus
Sudhir Kumar – Respondent


Advocates:
Muni Lal Verma, RANJIT GHOSAL, SIRAJ BAGGA, Sureshta Bagga, U.R.Lalit

Judgment

M.K. MUKHERJEE, J.- Special leave granted. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. On 24-9-1990 the appellant lodged a first information report (FIR) with the Civil Lines Police Station, Ludhiana alleging commission of offences under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code by her husband, parents-in-law and four other members of her husbands family. On that information a case was registered and on completion of investigation police submitted charge-sheet against all of them on 31-12-1990. Aggrieved thereby all the accused persons, except the appellants husband, filed a petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on 14-7-1991 seeking exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC for quashing the FIR and the proceeding arising therefrom. By the time the petition came up for hearing before the High Court, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana had taken cognizance upon the charge-sheet and, after hearing the parties, framed charges under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against all the accused persons. As they had pleaded not guilty the Magistrate had also fixed a date for recording of prosecution evidence. Before, h











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