Gaurav Nanda
17 January 2009 at 07:34
Sir, I am writing you this post on behalf of my brother who is 57 years old and is a 2nd engineer in merchant navy. His wife is 51 years old and they have 2 sons 23 and 18 years old at present.
To begin with about 8 or 9 years back my brother had a fight with his wife on which she left home taking the 2 minor boys with her. Then later she went to the police and registered a false case of dowry,cruelty,istridhan under sections 498,498A & 406. As a result my brother also approached court for anticipatory bail. There his wife laid a condition that she will not oppose the bail if she is given a residence for her and her sons living. My brother also agreed & he bought a 3 room flat in Delhi and gave the same to her just for the purpose of living only, after that he himself never went in the flat and stayed at Shimla in his mother's house. THEREAFTER she filed a case of maintenance restitution of conjugal rights and her temporary maintenance was fixed at 18000 per month.
Being in merchant navy my brother has to go to abroad and on high seas, here his wife always saw and continues to see golden opportunity to extract money and get her demands fulfilled. In these 9 years she many times threatened and sometimes also filed bail cancellation application in his absence, on false grounds if ever her demands were not fulfilled. Just because of his job my brother always agreed to her demands like flat, maintenance, etc without contesting the case. When their elder son turned 17 he decided to live with his father and is living with his father at present.
PRESENT SITUATION-: over these 9 years the criminal case went on a very very slow pace and except long dates nothing happened in the case. But few months back the stage of charge that is whether to be charge or not came. On seeing this a family matter the magistrate of Tis Hazari,Delhi asked both the parties if they want to go for mediation and both parties also agreed. Then this case was transferred to the mediation cell. Here his wife presented her demands like increase in maintenance,cash money,car,property,etc. and after some dates my friend also agreed to them. Then both the parties in present of their lawyers and judge signed the agreement in medition cell.Now as per the legal procedure the case in the mediation cell was over and again went back to magistrate court of Tis Hazari from where it was suppose to go to high court for questioning and final closer. But later greed came in her mind, she thinks that even more money can be extracted by further amending the agreement and so she retracted from the agreement of medition cell in the magistrate court & magistrate gave another date.His wife is asking the agreement to be rewritten or amended on which my brother is not agreeing. Is retracting from signed agreement legal? Does it not come under some crime like perjury or contempt? Is this also not some violation of any contract or civil law? ANY OTHER ADVICE IS THIS MATTER IS MOST WELCOMED.
Ranganath
16 January 2009 at 23:47
There was a compliant given at all women police station. Before interrogation I have got AB from high court. Interrogation happended, statements were recorded from both the sides. Registration of FIR is postponed. After one month FIR is registered based on another statement(? or complaint) dated one month after the first complaint. New facts were revealed in the second statement.
It is confusing the way FIR is registered.
1. Did the high court secure a copy of first complaint while granting AB.
2. Why there are 2 statements recorded on the complainant side. The first complaint was given by my wife's father, a statement givne by wife. The seocnd was given by my wife herself.
3.Is that a possibility that the first was withdrawn at the police level itself without going to court. Is that legal.
Please clarify
Jainodin shaikh
16 January 2009 at 19:40
In a private complaint against police officers; after directing the complainant to lead evidence and after recording the evidence, the court ordered the police to file a report u/s 202 of Cr.P.C. and concerned police despite of several reminders sent by the court; not submitting the report since last 4 month. The complainant moved an application for conducting the enquiry through an advocate(third party). But the court put the matter for waiting the report from the police who are the accused. What remedy is available for the complainant?
Legal Fighter
16 January 2009 at 09:27
how does time limitation apply to an FIR u/s 498/406 which is under investigation and the accused is on interim bail for past more than 2 years. most of the incidents mentioned in the FIR have already been more than 3 years old. does it mean that if the police takes 1 more year to file chargesheet, the case will be barred due to time limitation. Or this time limitation is not applicable to the priod of investigation or the Anticipatory Bail proceedings which are already going on in high court.
kindly help me understnading time limitation u/s 468 CrPC.
Jainodin shaikh
15 January 2009 at 22:52
Is it compulsory to comply with the provision of sec. 207 of Cr.P.C. (regarding to supply of documents and statements recorded in inquiry to the accused person) in a private complaint not excusively triable by the Cour of Sessions?
S.B.adil rahman
15 January 2009 at 21:41
The apex court decided the case of sanction for the prosecution of a public servant vide the below referred case on 7.1.2009. Can any one post the text of the judgement/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 8 OF 2009
@ S.L.P. (Crl.) NO.2864 of 2007
Choudhury Parveen Sultana Vs. State of West Bengal and Another
ALTAMAS KABIR, J. & MARKANDEY KATJU, J.
Dated : 07.01.2009
adil/Kolkata
M.S.Chandra Shekar
15 January 2009 at 13:14
A Exhibit in favour of the Defendent was manipulated in a Civil Case by the Registration Department. The civil case was decreed against the defendant. After that a Complaint to the CID was filed during 1980's, then the CID took up the case and due to some excuse from the registration depatment that the records are in some other court, the investigation was closed.
In 2007 the same exhibit was challenged by the Defendant in the High Court, The Registration Department failed to contest and the Hon'ble High Court gave the order in favour of the defendant/petitioner.
Now I (Defendant / petitioner) have filed a complaint to CID that there investigation was never complete and again ask them to conduct the investigation.
The CID Department in the current year comes out with a reply that they are not responsible to investigate Civil Matters.
Is this statement of CID Deparment is correct ?
kanwar Lal
15 January 2009 at 10:10
customer issued cheque of Rs 100000 to bank official but same was dishonourd due to reason "Refer to Drawer".
Can we file complaint u/s 138 against the cusotmer. Plz refer sny latest judgement.
What's the meaning of Refer to Drawer.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Witnesses In US Not Reliable, Says CBI
1984 Riots: Witnesses In US Not Reliable, Says CBI
15 Jan 2009, 2008 hrs IST, PTI
NEW DELHI:
CBI feels the two witnesses examined by its team in the United States in connection with the 1984 anti-Sikh riots were not credible enough and failed to give any proof linking former union minister Jagdish Tytler to the rioters.
Jasbir Singh, who was examined by a CBI team in San Fransisco, gave details of his movement between November 1 to 3, 1984, in which he named one Sucha Singh, a resident of Delhi university area, as the person who had given him shelter from the mob. Singh had given the age of Sucha Singh as 65 and said he owned a two-room house.
However, the CBI found out Sucha Singh was a resident near Ludlow castle school and he denied having provided shelter to anyone. He also told the CBI that he had a seven-room ancestral house and not as stated by the witness.
His statement was recorded under Section 161 Criminal Procedure Code at the Indian mission in San Francisco, CBI sources said.
Another witness Jasbinder Singh was examined by CBI at the Indian Mission in New York who could not give any fresh detail to the agency sleuths.
He told the CBI that he was hiding along with two "sevadars" (volunteers) and "Ragi" (who sings morning prayers) but failed to provide the name of the three people for independent verification of his statement.
The CBI, in its report to the court, concluded that the two witnesses could not be relied on.