Dowry act
ashokpandit
(Querist) 07 August 2013
This query is : Resolved
sir iss act m saza hoti hai 498a,323,3/4 dp act...? aur agar saza hoti hai to kitne saal ki..
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 07 August 2013
Ashok,
r u victim??
Think of defending yourself ,
Let court decide "saza or aquittal", as 98 % are acquitted.
Think of aquittal
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 07 August 2013
sja to jrur ho sakti hai agar case ko sabit kiya ja ske magar hogi kitni vo nirbhar krega ki kis dhang se apradh kiya gya hai aur doshiyo ka itihas kaisa hai.
ashokpandit
(Querist) 07 August 2013
sir mayne apni sister ki shadi 7 may 2013 ko ki thi but 1 june 2013 ko uske husbnd n zahar deke marne ki kosis ki hai
ashokpandit
(Querist) 07 August 2013
sir unko allahabad high cort s direction mill gaya hai
ashokpandit
(Querist) 07 August 2013
Hon'ble Vikram Nath,J.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Advocate and� Sri Neeraj Srivastava, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent no.3.�
This writ petition has been filed for quashing of an FIR in case crime No.97 of 2013 under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mutthiganj,� District Allahabad.
The writ court is not competent to go into questions of facts and on the allegations, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is disclosed. Hence, no ground exists for quashing the FIR or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
However, in the circumstances of the case, it is provided that if the petitioners move an application for surrender before the court concerned within three weeks from today, the Magistrate concerned shall fix a date about ten days thereafter for the appearance of the petitioners and in the meantime release the petitioners on interim bail on such terms and conditions as the court concerned considers fit and proper till the date fixed for the disposal of the regular bail.
The court concerned shall also direct the Public Prosecutor to seek instructions from the investigating officer by the date fixed and as far as possible also give an opportunity of hearing to the informant and thereafter decide the regular bail application of the petitioners in accordance with the observations of the Full Bench of this Court in Amrawati and another Vs. State of UP, 2005 Cri. LJ 755, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of UP, (2009) 4, SCC 437 and reiterated by the Division Bench of this Court in Sheoraj Singh alias Chuttan Vs. State of UP and others, 2009 (65) ACC 781.
If further instructions are needed or if adjournment of the case on the date fixed for hearing becomes unavoidable, the Court may fix another date, and may also extend the earlier order granting interim bail, if it deems fit provided that the adjournment of hearing of the regular bail on one or more dates should not exceed a total period of one month.
It will also be in the discretion of the Sessions/Special Judge concerned to consider granting interim bail pending consideration of the regular bail on similar terms as mentioned herein above when and if the petitioners apply for bail before him.
For a period of three weeks from today or till the petitioners appear/surrender before the court below and apply for bail (whichever is earlier), the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforementioned case crime.
It is made clear that if the petitioners fail to appear before the court concerned for the purpose of applying for bail within the time allowed, no further extension will be given.
In case the petitioners fail to appear before the court concerned on the dates fixed or they fail to cooperate with the investigating officer during investigation, it will be open to the Public Prosecutor to move an application for cancelling the order of interim/final bail and the Court concerned may pass an appropriate order on merits.
With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed off.
Order Date :- 7.6.2013
ashokpandit
(Querist) 07 August 2013
sir allahabad high cort ke ye direction k wajah se acjm 1st aj tak in logo ko intrim bell hi diye ja rahe hai
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 07 August 2013
nothing to add.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 07 August 2013
In view of the observation"provided that the adjournment of hearing of the regular bail on one or more dates should not exceed a total period of one month."
THE CJM CAN NOT POSTPONE HEARING BEYOND A MONTH.
ashokpandit
(Querist) 08 August 2013
right sir but cjm kisiki baat ko nahi sun haren hai wo to kewal apne maan ki kar rahe hai
