//
archives

JudicialMagistrate

This tag is associated with 2 posts

Dying Declaration – no corroboration needs = “Q: How many years have passed to your marriage? Ans: 8 years Q: How many children have you? Ans: Four Q: On which day the incident took place? Ans: The quarrel was continuing for the last 15 days. Q: On the night of last Thursday at 11.00 P.M. what happened with you? Ans: My husband used to say as to why I did not bring money in the marriage of my sister. He used to demand money from my father. My mother-in-law Ram Piari and father-in-law Siri Ram used to harass/tease me for dowry. It was Thursday, my mother-in-law, Devar (husband’s younger brother) Lala were at home. My mother-in-law caught hold of my hand and my husband set me on fire with match stick after sprinkling kerosene oil. My devar came afterwards, when I was set on fire. My husband gave beating to me and set me ablaze. Then my husband put his leg on my neck and I was beaten up mercilessly. After 8Page 9 that my father-in-law came, but he did not set me on fire. My husband, mother-in-law and father-in-law brought me to the hospital. Q: Do you want to say any thing else? Ans: No (Right great Toe impression of Patient) Sd/- J.M.I.C.(D) R.O. & A.C. Patient remained fit and conscious during the statement Sd/- in English Dr. Raman Sethi P.G. Surg 5/IV”=(e) On 21.05.1998, Rakesh was arrested and got medically examined by the doctor who opined that his hands were found to be having superficial to deep burns. On his disclosure, a stove containing the kerosene was recovered.- if he had sustained burn injuries in his hands nothing prevented him from taking treatment on the same day from the same doctor. Admittedly, he did not get treatment till he was arrested on 21.05.1998.

Page 1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1779 OF 2009 Rakesh and Another …. Appellant(s) Versus State of Haryana …. Respondent(s) J U D G M E N T P.Sathasivam,J. 1) This appeal has been filed against the final judgment and order dated 15.05.2006 passed by the High … Continue reading

Indian Penal Code, 1860 : Sections 295-A, 499, 500 r/w. 34-Defamation-Interview to a film magazine- Appellant making statements against a particular community-Alleged to be deliberate, malicious and outraging the religious feelings of that community-Complaint-Magistrate taking cognizance and issuing notice to appellant-Challenge before High Court which held that no offence under S.295A made out but the allegations constitute prima facie offence triable by Magistrate under S.500 =On appeal held the allegations do not contain essential facts constituting offence under S.295A-The complaint filed before the Judicial Magistrate Pune does not contain allegations to constitute an offence of defamation punishable under S.500-Hence that complaint quashed-Complaint filed before the Judicial Magistrate Nasik-High Court was right in refusing to quash the complaint under S.500. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 1696 of 1996. =, 1996( 5 )Suppl.SCR 771, 1996( 6 )SCC 263, 1996( 6 )SCALE769 , 1997(10 )JT 469

PETITIONER: SHATRUGHNA PRASAD SINHA Vs. RESPONDENT: RAJBHAU SURAJMAL RATHI & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 10/09/1996 BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. FAIZAN UDDIN (J) G.B. PATTANAIK (J) ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: O R D E R Leave granted. Though the respondents were duly served and on an occasion appeared in person, subsequently they did not appear. … Continue reading

Blog Stats

  • 2,954,444 hits

ADVOCATE MMMOHAN

archieves

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

Join 1,912 other subscribers
Follow advocatemmmohan on WordPress.com