Listed here are Judgments in support of legal point
Decisions of Civil Courts are binding on the Criminal Courts
Listed here are Judgments in support of legal point
Decisions of Civil Courts are binding on the Criminal Courts
425. Mischief.
—Whoever with intent to cause, or knowing that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to the public or to any person, causes the destruction of any property, or any such change in any property or in the situation thereof as destroys or diminishes its value or utility, or affects it injuriously, commits “mischief”.
Explanation 1.—It is not essential to the offence of mischief that the offender should intend to cause loss or damage to the owner of the property injured or destroyed. It is sufficient if he intends to cause, or knows that he is likely to cause, wrongful loss or damage to any person by injuring any property, whether it belongs to that person or not.
Explanation 2.—Mischief may be committed by an act affecting property belonging to the person who commits the act, or to that person and others jointly.
Illustrations
AP High Court delivered this Quash verdict reiterating that ‘Decisions of Civil Courts are binding on the Criminal Courts‘
Battula Siva Nageshwar Rao Vs Jasti Venkateswara Rao & Another on 31 March, 2016
Read about Section 383 of IPC by clicking here.
Read about Section 427 of IPC by clicking here.
427. Mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees.
—Whoever commits mischief and thereby causes loss or damage to the amount of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
383. Extortion.
—Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits “extortion”.
Illustrations
This is from Punjab and Haryana High Court in a 498A, 406 case.
IPC 498a Not Made Out
The Civil Court in the divorce proceedings filed by Complainant has also held that the allegations levelled against the defendants that they had demanded the dowry and harassed the complainant have been found false.
This Court is of opinion that in such a short span of 13 days, demand of dowry, as has been alleged by the petitioner, could not have been made by the respondent or his family members.
This Court is conscious of a fact that in these days when the number of divorce petitions are increasing in our society, this is one of the easiest allegations to level against the husband by the wife. It is easy to level it but it is very difficult to prove the same.
Judge has allowed the divorce on the ground that the marriage between the parties is a dead marriage.
IPC 406 Not Made Out
There is no specific allegation in the complaint regarding the entrustment of dowry articles as to whom the articles were given. When there is no specific allegation, the charge cannot prove.
Krishan Jeet Singh Vs State Of Haryana on 3 October, 2002Citations: [2
Other Source links:
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
Here is the landmark Supreme Court judgement reiterating that ‘Decisions of Civil Courts are binding on the Criminal Courts‘
Karam Chand Ganga Prasad And Anr. Vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 12 October, 1970
This is an interesting Judgment of AP High Court whereby the accused is acquitted under IPC 498A (max punishment is 3 years) but convicted under IPC 325 (max punishment is 7 years) !!
Section 325 in The Indian Penal Code
Bomma Ilaiah Vs The State Of A.P. Rep. By Public on 9 January, 2003
Citations: [2
Other Source links:
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from main.sci.gov.in/judgments, judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
If you have already used up/could not utilize the Discharge (before framing of charges on the Accused i.e., you and your family) and the Quash (after framing of charges on the Accused i.e., you and your family) due to lack of legal grounds or rejection by court for valid reasons and you do NOT want to go with Settlement route, read on.
Click here to understand the high-level workflow or lifecycle of IPC 498A cases for making yourself familiar with same.
While you are at it, it may occur to you that, rather than feed the lawyer, who gets fed but doesn’t deliver the results as expected by you, it would seem obvious and most sensible thing to do is to present and argue your case on your own. That is called as arguing your case as Party-in-person.
Read here for more on what Party-in-person means.
UPDATE 1:
https://www.livelaw.in/breaking-sc-modifies-the-earlier-directions-issued-to-prevent-misuse-of-498a-ipc-says-no-to-welfare-committees/
UPDATE 2:
Few directions given in this judgment are held to be erroneous. Here is the new article.
https://www.livelaw.in/sec-498a-ipc-only-hc-can-quash-cases-on-settlement-a-third-agency-created-by-courts-cant-exercise-statutory-functionssc/
The detailed order is available here.
Guidelines issued by Hon’ble Supreme Court:
Part 5.
In respect of persons ordinarily residing out of India impounding of passports or issuance of Red Corner Notice should not be a routine;
Citations: [2017 SCC ONLINE SC 821], [2017 AIR SC 3869], [2017 AJR 4 408], [2017 ALLMR CRI 3526], [2017 ALLCC 100 927], [2017 ACR 2 2225], [2017 ALT CRL AP 2 393], [2017 ALD CRL SC 2 568], [2017 BOMCR CRI 3 677], [2017 CGLJ 3 573], [2017 CCR SC 3 211], [2017 CTC 4 667], [2017 DMCSC 2 747], [2017 GLH 2 818], [2017 GLR 3 2430], [2017 ILR KER 3 425], [2017 JLJR 3 180], [2017 JCC 3 1919], [2017 KHC 4 163], [2017 KLJ 3 861], [2017 MLJ CRL 3 602], [2017 PLJR 3 240], [2017 RLW SC 3 2266], [2017 RCR CRIMINAL 3 836], [2017 SCALE 8 313], [2017 SCJ 7 94], [2017 UC 3 1601], [2017 WLN SC 3 81], [2018 SCC 10 472], [2019 SCC CRI 1 3012017 SCR 9 529], [2017 GUJ LR 3 2430], [2017 GUJ LH 2 818], [2017 AIC 177 224], [2017 CRIMES 3 268], [2017 ECRN 3 381], [2018 CRI LJ 3593
News Article:
http://www.livelaw.in/breaking-misuse-of-s-498a-sc-directs-to-form-family-welfare-committees-to-examine-each-cases-no-arrests-before-committees-report-read-new-guidelines/
Bad Behavior has blocked 739 access attempts in the last 7 days.