The section was enacted to combat the menace of dowry deaths. The Court also recognized some areas for remedial steps. Most cases where Sec A is invoked turn out to be false as repeatedly accepted by High Courts and Supreme Court in India as they are mere blackmail attempts by the wife or her close relatives when faced with a strained marriage. Supreme Court Of India Conviction for offence under Section cannot be sustained in absence of unlawful demand for property and valuable articles. Misuse and exploitation of provisions to such an extent that it is hitting at foundation of marriage itself and proved to be not so good for the health of society at large. According to the court, even though there were dowry demands in the past, the court felt that.
The Court in the case issued directions to the Centre which might aid in preventing misuse of Law and safeguard against uncalled for arrests. It is a cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable offence. June 12, 0. When main accused already acquitted in trial, continuance of criminal proceedings against in-laws, would be abuse of process of law especially when there is bleak possibility of conviction. Court at Jodhpur has no jurisdiction to try case.
Witnesses declared hostile by prosecution: C is to protect a woman who is being harassed by her husband or relatives of husband. Judgment rendered by Trial Court set aside. The csae of complaints, accusation or taunts on a person amounting to cruelty depends on various factors like the sensitivity of the victim concerned, the social background, the environment, education etc.
All other evidence discarded by Trial Court and co-accused acquitted. Arrest warrant should be issued only against the main accused and only after cognizance has been taken.
It is nowhere case of prosecution that prior to incident deceased has left the matrimonial house on account of ill-treatment and harassment.
Gujarat High Court Cause of action for filing criminal complaint and cause of action for quashing complaint. FIR lodged by wife quashed. Entire facts in FIR taken at their face value and accepted in entirety stkdy not prima facie constitute any offence or make out case against accused.
Top 5 Supreme Court judgment on misuse of 498A
Proximity of the death to be caused due to such a demand was unlikely . Now a days there are lot of agents who will get all this done for you. March 22, 0.
April 3, 0.
State Of Punjab Court: It cannot be said that she had no other alternative but to commit suicide. In most cases a complaint is followed by the demand of huge amount of money extortion to settle the case out of the court. Most popular articles Nalsar final recruitments: Victim was 22 years of age.
In the ilc of Punjab National Bank and Ors.
498a Landmark Judgements
High Court Of Uttarakhand Criminal — Section Quashing of proceedings — Prayer sought to quash entire proceedings jpc criminal complaint case pending before Court — Held, in view of discussion, Court was of view that impugned complaint aims just to sheer harassment of Husband and his parents and thus, same deserved to be quashed — Petition allowed.
Kiran was minor at the time of occurrence. April 24, 0. October 19, 0. Supreme Court Of India Quashing of Cognizance Order — General allegation of physical and mental torture in FIR — Mere casual reference of names of appellants in FIR without allegation of active involvement in matrimonial dispute would not justify taking cognizance against them. The Court referred to the case of S. In most cases a complaint is followed by the demand of huge amount of money extortion to settle the case out of the court.
Important Judgments on Section A of IPC
Misuse and exploitation of provisions to such an extent that it is hitting at foundation of marriage itself and proved to be not so good for the health of society at large. February 1, 0.
It may, therefore, become necessary for the legislature to find out ways how the makers of frivolous complaints or allegations can be appropriately dealt with.
Dishonour of Cheque — Section of the Negotiable instruments Act. No reasons to interfere with impugned judgment. The presumption of cruelty within the meaning of section A, Evidence Act, also arose making the husband guilty of abetment of suicide within the meaning of section where the husband had illicit relationship with another woman and used to beat his wife making it a persistent cruelty within the meaning of Explanation a of section A.
Sarla Prabhakar Waghmare Vs. The offence of cruelty is ipcc and cognizable offence but due to the direction making it impossible to arrest before the report of such committee has made this ineffective.