Ss. 205 and 313 - Exemption from personal appearance - Matrimonial dispute - Implication of parents-in-law - They
being senior citizens, held, trial court directed to exempt their personal appearance on condition that they would keep
their counsel present on each date of hearing and cooperate during trial - If they fail to do so then trial court can compel
their personal appearance,
Sheoraj Singh Ahlawat v. State of U.P., (2013) 11 SCC 476
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Ss. 227, 228, 239, 240 and 91 - Framing of charges/Discharge of accused - Approach to be followed by courts -
Principles summarised,
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Ss. 239 and 240 - Discharge of accused - Refusal of, on ground that inconsistency in materials produced by
prosecution cannot be looked into for discharge of accused in absence of full-fledged trial - Validity of - In her complaint,
Respondent 2-complainant alleging that Appellant 3-accused (her husband) and Appellants 1 & 2 (her parents-in-law)
subjected her to cruelty, harassment and demanded dowry - Appellants-accused filing application for discharge based on
contradictions in statement of witnesses - Trial court rejecting their application concluding that discharge could be
considered after prosecution adducing evidence - High Court also declined to discharge appellant-accused - Tenability of
- Held, allegations against all appellant-accused were specific - Truthfulness of those allegations could not be determined
while framing charges and that can be ascertained only after conclusion of trial - Court cannot speculate truthfulness of
falsity of allegations made against accused while framing of charge - Contradictions and inconsistencies in statement of
witnesses cannot be looked into at this stage for discharge of appellant-accused, though they may be considered after
completion of trial - Though unscrupulous litigants take advantage of legal process and such measure might subject
innocent persons, falsely implicated in criminal cases, to harassment but as long as legal requirement and settled
principles do not permit discharge of accused, he cannot be discharged - As allegations against appellant-accused were
very specific, refusal of discharge was proper,
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Ss. 205 and 313 - Exemption from personal appearance - Matrimonial dispute - Implication of parents-in-law - They
being senior citizens, held, trial court directed to exempt their personal appearance on condition that they would keep
their counsel present on each date of hearing and cooperate during trial - If they fail to do so then trial court can compel
their personal appearance,
Print Page
being senior citizens, held, trial court directed to exempt their personal appearance on condition that they would keep
their counsel present on each date of hearing and cooperate during trial - If they fail to do so then trial court can compel
their personal appearance,
Sheoraj Singh Ahlawat v. State of U.P., (2013) 11 SCC 476
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Ss. 227, 228, 239, 240 and 91 - Framing of charges/Discharge of accused - Approach to be followed by courts -
Principles summarised,
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Ss. 239 and 240 - Discharge of accused - Refusal of, on ground that inconsistency in materials produced by
prosecution cannot be looked into for discharge of accused in absence of full-fledged trial - Validity of - In her complaint,
Respondent 2-complainant alleging that Appellant 3-accused (her husband) and Appellants 1 & 2 (her parents-in-law)
subjected her to cruelty, harassment and demanded dowry - Appellants-accused filing application for discharge based on
contradictions in statement of witnesses - Trial court rejecting their application concluding that discharge could be
considered after prosecution adducing evidence - High Court also declined to discharge appellant-accused - Tenability of
- Held, allegations against all appellant-accused were specific - Truthfulness of those allegations could not be determined
while framing charges and that can be ascertained only after conclusion of trial - Court cannot speculate truthfulness of
falsity of allegations made against accused while framing of charge - Contradictions and inconsistencies in statement of
witnesses cannot be looked into at this stage for discharge of appellant-accused, though they may be considered after
completion of trial - Though unscrupulous litigants take advantage of legal process and such measure might subject
innocent persons, falsely implicated in criminal cases, to harassment but as long as legal requirement and settled
principles do not permit discharge of accused, he cannot be discharged - As allegations against appellant-accused were
very specific, refusal of discharge was proper,
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Ss. 205 and 313 - Exemption from personal appearance - Matrimonial dispute - Implication of parents-in-law - They
being senior citizens, held, trial court directed to exempt their personal appearance on condition that they would keep
their counsel present on each date of hearing and cooperate during trial - If they fail to do so then trial court can compel
their personal appearance,
No comments:
Post a Comment