Apurva Kumar
01 December 2008 at 20:17
Dear Friends,
One of my hearing related to sec-304B has recently opend.In which we are from the side of the accused,while going thru the L.C.R i came thru a very strange ommission of the law point at trial i.e,sec-313 cr.pc Power to examine the accused whch was not done by the presiding officer of the case though there was question in the deposition paper but same was not answer either in affermative or negative it was left blank. And my client has been imprisoned to life along with ors by trial crt.I take this point today in the court which was appriciated but state told that it cant vitiate the whole trial and i want some citation with brief fact and some case law in my favour to prove my self. please help me and enlighten on the above mentioned fact.Please support me if anyone can?
Regard
Apurva kr
Lawyer P.H.C
Ch. Sujatha
30 November 2008 at 21:09
Resected Seniors,
Mr. 'A' married Ms. 'B', 3 years back and at present they are living separately since they are having some disputes from two years.
In the above case wife is having job and sufficient means to maintain herself. But the husband is no job and no means to maintain himself.
In the above circumstances Mr. 'A' husband, can claim maintaenance from Ms.'B' wife under section 125 of Cr.P.C.
If it is possible please send some citations infavour of Mr. 'A' husbabd.
Ch. Sujatha
30 November 2008 at 20:57
Respected Seniors,
Mr. 'A' Married Ms. 'B'. Later on Mr. 'A' deserted Ms. 'B' as there is no issues between Mr. 'A' and Ms.'B', and again Mr. 'A' Married Ms. 'C'without obtaining divorse from Ms. 'B'.
Mr. 'A' and Ms. 'C' together consumated marrital life for a petiod of 10 years which resulted there are 2 issues for Mr. 'A'. and Ms. 'C'.
Later on Mr.'A' neglected Ms.'C'. as she is no means to maintain herself and Mr. 'A' having sufficient means. The children with Ms. 'C'.
My querry is whether Mr. 'C' and 2 children entitle to get maintainance from Mr. 'A' under section 125 Cr.P.C.
If it is possible please send some citations on this aspect.
Thanking You in advance.
Ladhu Ram Chowdhary
29 November 2008 at 21:17
under sec.91 order by magistrate is interlocutory or not!
Chandra sekhar
29 November 2008 at 20:08
Dear All
The facts of the case are as under. I am for the accused. The accused and the complainants are family friends for over 3 decades. The complainant had sold a property to the accused and executed a registered sale deed. As a part of the sale consideration the accused has issued a Cheque for Rs 65000/- and mentioned clearly in the sale deed. The accused maintained sufficient balance into his bank account as on the date of issue of the Cheque. Immediately the next day after the sale transaction the accused went to the property and found that there are third party claimants on this property and well as that of Governments claim on this property and civil litigations were there much before the sale transaction took place. The District Collector, Thasildhar and other Government Officials have imposed ban on the sale of this property much before the sale transaction took place. But the complainant purchased the property with different survey numbers and after coming to know the problems he has cleverly sold the property to the accused who is his friend. By then the accused has paid huge amount to the complainant except the mentioned Cheque amount. The accused has informed not to present the Cheque. The complainant has assured to solve the problems and has done nothing and presented the for collection as the time of the Cheque was getting lapsed at the end of 6 months. The Cheque bounced. Cheque bounce case and a civil case for cancellation of the sale deed was filed by the complainant.. After some time the Complainant got amended the civil case for recovery of the balance sale consideration in the event of the sale deed cannot be cancelled. The Civil case was won by us and pending at the High Court
The Accused got the land survey done by the Thasildar office to prove that the survey numbers mentioned are wrong and also procured more than 30 documents to prove the land has several claims and Govt. Claims. The Concerned Deputy Collector was summoned to the court by the accused and he has clearly stated in his chief and Cross examination that the property belongs to the Government.
The complainant has filed only a certified copy of the Cheque in the Criminal Court.
I request members to provide and useful information and High court or S.C. judgments favorable to the accused.
Thank you
sampoorna
28 November 2008 at 11:38
respected experts,
this is the matter came to all of your notice, that my husband is upscandind since 4 years and a crime case is pending on him and his famaily members, on dowry probhition, and an n.b.w is pending on him since 4 years, till now he did not attend to the court,my husband famaily members are forcing me to take the n.b.w which is pending on my husband,and they even asking me to make an agreement. so, that if they present those agreement in the court the court can dissmiss the warrents,
it is confusing me a lot,is it possibel that an accused (a1) without apperieng to the court,just if the counsil keep the agreement papers can his n.b.w is removed.
how can his n.b.w can be removed if we both compromise in the metter.
sampoorna
allurisivajiraju
28 November 2008 at 08:36
Respected Seniors,
Mr. 'A' Received a cheque drawn on Bank 'B' from Mr. 'C'. Then after obtaining cheque and Before filing the said cheque for presentation the said bank 'B' was regulated by Sec. 35 A of Reserve Bank of India which resulted the entire transactions of the Bank 'B' were stoped.
In the above circumstances Mr. A Presented his cheque in his account. It was returned with an endorsement " There is no person to collect the cheques of Bank 'B' at the clearing House".
Now what is the otion available to Mr. 'A'. Whether basing on the said endorsement can he file a case under section 138 and 142 of the N.I.Act against Mr. 'C'.There is a time for issue notice.
Thanking You Sir.
amitkaur
27 November 2008 at 21:38
IF ANY PERSON CHARGED WITH MURDER ACCEPTS DURING POLICE INVESTIGATION THAT HE HAS MURDERED .THEN ,IS THAT CONSENT (THEORY OF POLICE ACCEPTED BY THAT PERSON ) IS TAKEN AGANIST HIM S A EVIDENCE AND HE IS CONVICTED OR NOT .
amitkaur
27 November 2008 at 21:14
WHAT IS COURT OF SESSION AND HOW IT IS DIFFERENT FROM HIGH COURT IN THE TERMS OF POWERS AND JURISDICTION .
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
377 IPC by juvenile
Offence committed by juvenile u/s.377 IPC, what will its legal status,
In which court its triable,
What punishment will be there,
ommit