A clear attempt to link circumstances to a pre-judged conclusion by Hon’ble CJ of India himself. At best, this is just an attempt to let go off one of the many grounds husband’s can take in their Discharge and Quash petitions, going against such landmark precendents.
If this assumption is allowed to continue, ablanaris will claim, her hubby dear comes in her dreams and molests, threatens, harasses, violates her & thereby it is a continuing offence as per Black&White Dictionary and attracts 173 CrPC squarely, and consequently your’s truly will wag their tails (heads may be) to it too.
Alright. Little bit of difficulty in travel involved. We will use 20 other grounds, Mr. CJI. We also have clubbing of cases judgment and many more judgments on our side.
Rupali Devi Vs State of UP and Ors on 09 April, 2019
Frankly speaking, one has to see the caveat laid by Supreme Court in this judgment. Only when the Prosecution can establish that there was threat to the life and/or limb of the knife due to which the false case if institute out side the Jurisdiction, where the alleged offence has happened as mentioned in the Complaint, this judgment can be gainfully invoked. Else, the ground of Territorial Jurisdiction is still a valid ground to see Discharge or Quash from a false case.
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in