498a & 406
Mustafa Bhat
(Querist) 21 May 2014
This query is : Resolved
Sir,
Today the lady/Complaint was examined, She made statement under Crpc164 today were in she which said a lot which she has not said in Crpc 161.
Will it be called improvisation.Will it benefit me/accused.
When asked about the demand she said the list which i have given in police station is list of demanded & i have given it to my inlaws as they demanded,when asked why she has not given receipt/Voucher of these items to police she said. She replied that I have given receipt/ Voucher to my inlaws so they were not with her.In crpc 161 she not said anything about Voucher/ receipt.
She also said in Crpc 164 that accused has demanded house,but she has not said anything about house in her Crpc 161 or in her complain.
She was asked in cross examination that does she have ATM,she replied yes but I used to keep it with accused.
Sir My point regarding ATM was basically different, I have got her ATM details were in she has made all ATM Transaction in the month in which she claims to be thrown out of house by accused & inlaws from her parental house & that too in early morning & late in evening which i almost 30 KM from place.So it didnot worked the way i wanted.Actually she was already at the her parental house two months before which she allege the date of occurrence .Will it create any problem
Please advise are they Contradictions/Improvisation. Will it help me/accused any ways.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 21 May 2014
pl ask in same thread..
Sankaranarayanan
(Expert) 21 May 2014
You put this post in the same thread will easy to give suggestion
ajay sethi
(Expert) 21 May 2014
post queries in same thread
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 21 May 2014
This is new thread, if any query continue the same thread.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 21 May 2014
If it has already done then why you have opened this new one?
Mustafa Bhat
(Querist) 21 May 2014
This is not the same thread, it is basically the PW1 statement, earlier thread was of PW2 & PW3, so please advise
Mustafa Bhat
(Querist) 21 May 2014
Please advise
Today the lady/Complaint was examined, She made statement under Crpc164 today were in she which said a lot which she has not said in Crpc 161.
Will it be called improvisation.Will it benefit me/accused.
When asked about the demand she said the list which i have given in police station is list of demanded & i have given it to my inlaws as they demanded,when asked why she has not given receipt/Voucher of these items to police she said. She replied that I have given receipt/ Voucher to my inlaws so they were not with her.In crpc 161 she not said anything about Voucher/ receipt.
She also said in Crpc 164 that accused has demanded house,but she has not said anything about house in her Crpc 161 or in her complain.
She also deposed in court that I was compelled by my husband to take loan, So i took loan of 4 lacs & from it my husband purchased the Santroo Car.This she also said in 161.
In 164 she added that she has taken loan before marriage as she compelled throw middle man by her husband to take loan.
Sir, but the fact of matter is i donot have Santroo car at the time of marriage nor even after two years of marriage.I did purchased one but at that time she has already left my house.
What is credibility of such statement.
She was asked in cross examination that does she have ATM,she replied yes but I used to keep it with accused.
Sir My point regarding ATM was basically different, I have got her ATM details were in she has made all ATM Transaction in the month in which she claims to be thrown out of house by accused & inlaws from her parental house & that too in early morning & late in evening which i almost 30 KM from place.So it didnot worked the way i wanted.Actually she was already at the her parental house two months before which she allege the date of occurrence .Will it create any problem
Please advise are they Contradictions/Improvisation. Will it help me/accused any ways.
Mustafa Bhat
(Querist) 22 May 2014
Sudhir Sir,
This is the gist of lady / complaint while giving statement in 164 & cross examination,
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 26 May 2014
repeated
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/498A-406-473816.asp#.U4NQ2nb5ugA
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 26 May 2014
also repeated
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/498A-406-472951.asp
