//
you're reading...
legal issues

Sec. 304 B and Sec.306 I.P.C.- Sec.319 Cr.P.C – summoning a person who is not a relative of the Husband to face trial as his name was mentioned in FIR and in Evidence – High court set aside the order of trial court – Apex court held that the word “relative of the husband” in Section 304 B of the IPC would mean such persons, who are related by blood, marriage or adoption. When we apply this principle the respondent herein is not related to the husband of the deceased either by blood or marriage or adoption. Hence, in our opinion, the High Court did not err in passing the impugned order. We hasten to add that a person, not a relative of the husband, may not be prosecuted for offence under Section 304B IPC but this does not mean that such a person cannot be prosecuted for any other offence viz. Section 306 IPC, in case the allegations constitute offence other than Section 304B IPC. = STATE OF PUNJAB ….. APPELLANT VERSUS GURMIT SINGH …. RESPONDENT = 2014 – July. Part – http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41737

Sec. 304 B and Sec.306 I.P.C.- Sec.319 Cr.P.C – summoning a person who is not a relative of the Husband to face trial as his name was mentioned in FIR and in Evidence – High court set aside the order of trial court – Apex court held that the  word  “relative of the husband” in Section 304 B of the IPC would  mean  such  persons,  who are related by blood, marriage or adoption.  When we  apply  this  principle the respondent herein is not related to the husband of the  deceased either by blood or marriage or adoption.  Hence, in our  opinion,  the  High  Court did not err in passing the impugned order.  We hasten to add that a  person, not a relative of the husband, may  not  be  prosecuted  for  offence  under Section 304B IPC but this does  not  mean  that  such  a  person  cannot  be prosecuted for  any  other  offence  viz.  Section  306  IPC,  in  case  the allegations constitute offence other than Section 304B IPC. =

 

High court held that

“Even the dictionary meaning of a relative is one who is  related  by  blood

or marriage.  Gurmit Singh  is  certainly  not  related  to  Paramjit  Singh

either by blood or  by  marriage.   Gurmit  Singh  would  not  fall  in  the

category of relative of  the  husband.   Therefore,  Gurmit  Singh  must  be

excluded from the array of the accused.  It is  not  necessary  to  try  him

under Section 304B I.P.C. for the dowry death of Paramjit Singh’s wife.=

 

We  do

not  find  anything  in  context  to  deviate  from  the  general  rule   of

interpretation.  Hence, we have no manner of doubt that the  word  “relative

of the husband” in Section 304 B of the IPC would  mean  such  persons,  who

are related by blood, marriage or adoption.  When we  apply  this  principle

the respondent herein is not related to the husband of the  deceased  either

by blood or marriage or adoption.  Hence, in our  opinion,  the  High  Court

did not err in passing the impugned order.  We hasten to add that a  person,

not a relative of the husband, may  not  be  prosecuted  for  offence  under

Section 304B IPC but this does  not  mean  that  such  a  person  cannot  be

prosecuted for  any  other  offence  viz.  Section  306  IPC,  in  case  the

allegations constitute offence other than Section 304B IPC.

In the result, we do not find any  merit  in  the  appeal  and  it  is

dismissed accordingly.

2014 – July. Part – http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41737 – for full text – LAW FOR ALL.

Advertisements

About advocatemmmohan

ADVOCATE

Discussion

Comments are closed.

Blog Stats

  • 1,729,188 hits

ADVOCATE MMMOHAN

archieves

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,854 other followers

Follow advocatemmmohan on WordPress.com