Evidence suggests that deceased could not accompany Appellant due to passport issues rather than any proven harassment therefore, without solid proof of cruelty or harassment during their marriage, conviction under Section 498A IPC was overturned.
Observations and directions issued shall neither be construed nor interpreted as adverse remarks against functioning or conduct of any Judge of High Court of Jharkhand or of any other High Court.
Given civil nature of dispute, allowing prosecution could undermine integrity of settlement processes in commercial transactions, ultimately affecting broader economy hence, charge sheet and charge framing order of Special Judicial Magistrate are quashed.
Preliminary objection to maintainability of Petition is upheld and petition is dismissed on grounds of Petitioners lack of locus and inordinate delay and laches associated with case.
If case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence then in such cases, chain of circumstances must be complete and cogent and must unerringly point towards guilt of accused and exclude every other reasonable hypothesis.
Impugned Judgment of acquittal could not withstand legal scrutiny and should be set aside, restoring Criminal Appeal No. 07/2019 for lawful consideration.
Significant gap occurred between alleged demands for money and suicide, implying FIR was filed with ulterior motives and proceeding with case would constitute an abuse of legal process hence, impugned FIR registered for alleged offences, set aside.
Appellants arguments regarding nature of incident are unfounded, supporting prosecutions case against him hence, impugned order of conviction held proper.
Two cases linked to FIRs from Chaturshrungi and Lashkar Police Stations in Pune should be combined and tried together in Special MPID Court in Chaturshrungi and larger case, MPID Special Case No. 14 of 2017, will serve as basis for this combined trial.
Impugned order of conviction and sentence imposed upon appellant, confirmed, as prosecution has succeeded in proving beyond reasonable doubt that appellant committed alleged offences.
In computing compensation for the death of a homemaker, courts must recognize the economic value of unpaid domestic work.
Evidence presented by prosecution led to conviction of applicant and bail was denied, overturning presumption of innocence.
Possibility of false implications against applicant is acknowledged, though this observation is solely for current application and will not affect other court proceedings hence, applicant shall be released on bail.
Impugned order and supplementary charge sheet were quashed because the State misinterpreted Section 173 (8) of CrPC, failing to obtain prior permission from Trial Court before conducting further investigation and filing supplementary charge sheet.
FIR outlines systematic plan to defraud Respondent No. 2, suggesting prima facie case of criminality and commission of cognizable offence related to cheating hence, impugned FIR registered of alleged offences cannot be quashed.
Court have carefully perused Committees Final Report and largely agree with its recommendations for resolving outstanding claims and ensuring equitable disbursal of dues to affected employees.
In accordance with Supreme Court guidelines, if cheque amount is paid before Sessions or High Court during appeal or revision, court may allow for compounding of offence, contingent on accused paying costs of 7.5% of cheque amount.
Appellant shall be entitled to benefits extended in terms of Board Orders and no benefit accrued in his favour shall be withdrawn.
Lack of subjective satisfaction from Detaining Authority on necessity for detention under M.P.D.A Act and absence of any indication of bail misuse post-release further underscore deficiencies in order, warranting setting aside of order of detention.
Award dated 21.10.2013 was found to be patently illegal, as it denied owners rightful compensation under both Clause 7 and Clause 13 of agreement.
Tap the button below to open the PDF in your device's default viewer