LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

ABCD (HR Consultant)     23 December 2015

211 against 498a

Dear Members,

Thanks a ton for your kind advise.

My updates:

1. 498a (Complaint Case)= Under Revision, order awaited.....

2. Interiem Application (125)= A detailed reply has been submitted with all deatils of qualification, her behaviour during stay, pshychological records, negligience, not wiling to come, avoiding RCR etc. out put awiated.

3. Now they want to buy their own cases.

Further work:

1. High Court if not convinced (498a)

2. 211 against In Laws & team (not yet)

3. Opposing lawful begging (125).

Your direction, suggestions, comments.

Regards

ABCD

 

 



Learning

 8 Replies

A walk alone (-)     23 December 2015

If opposite party are agreed for settlement then pay them and get rid of all cases. By paying you can save your time and get rid lengthy court procedure . Go for mcd and pay one time settlement.

SAINATH DEVALLA (LEGAL CONSULTANT)     24 December 2015

Dear ABCD,

Last one year U have been giving updates of all UR cases which I have been replying.Any way its a good progress though time taking.Good Luck.

Rocky Smith (Instructor @ Calcutta (rockysmith4calcutta@gmail.com))     24 December 2015

I have already stated the draw-backs of any mutual settlements in my profile. Please have a look.

Rocky Smith (Instructor @ Calcutta (rockysmith4calcutta@gmail.com))     24 December 2015

@Quest,

Your question is not clear here.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate)     01 January 2016

The proposed action invoking the provisions of section 211 IPC against your in laws may not be maintainable because they are not involved in the 498a complaint against you.  It is your wife who has lodged the complaint and the state is prosecuting on her behalf. 

The term begging in 125 cr.p.c. is not understood.  They have filed the case and it is going on in the court, the court has not passed any orders or judgment, where is the question of begging?, Did they send some messenger to you begging to grant maintenance, if so dont agree, let the court decide so that they do not resort to such practice in future even after getting one time quit settlement now. 

ABCD (HR Consultant)     01 January 2016

Thanks@ Kalaiselvan Sir,

I was waiting for your valuables comments:

211 IPC : you are right , does it attract wrong statement/ witness just to strenghthen wrong story.

125 CRPC : Case is on, mirror of truth is quite clean rather tactics of others. Player of the game approching my nears.

That can be discussed later with them, my priority is court.

Happy New Year

Regards

ABCD

adv.raghavan (Advocate,9444674980)     04 January 2016

I fully agree with Kalai sir, i do not think IPC 211 can be invoked now.Where the offence is alleged to have committed u/s 211 of IPC, but the matter did not reached the Court of law for trial and proceedings or investigation terminated, then, a direct Complaint u/s 200 or Application u/s 156(3) of CrPC, can be made before the Magistrates court concerned against those persons who have made false charge of offence.Where, in pursuance to said false complaint, criminal proceedings before the Magistrates Court / Sessions Court have been initiated, then, an Applications u/s 340 read with section 195 of CrPC , may be preferred before the said Magistrate / Sessions court, against those persons, praying therein for Magistrates / Sessions court to refer the said offence of false accusation to the appropriate / competent Magistrate Court of jurisdiction.  IPC section 211: False charge of offence made with intent to injure)

 
 

ABCD (HR Consultant)     08 January 2016

Thanks Mr. Raghavan,

Valuable & directive information.

Regards

ABCD


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register