Urgent and best decision needed

I think approaching the HC would be a good option and you can add more grounds without changing the original version. However take extra precautions so that your story doesnt sound too embellished.

Overall i cant comment further because of the limited facts supplied by you

District courts does not have determination of Article 227 on Indian Constitution. Only HC has.

Please read each of my posts carefully in the following links for sample petitions and other necessary clues.

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Fight-against-misuse-of-498a-ipc--103100.asp#.U6gslUCm9dg

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Best-way-to-fight-against-false-498a-103111.asp#.U6gsRkCm9dg

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/details.asp?mod_id=104564&offset=1

Going HC is better option if and only if you go in-person (Without Advocate).

Okay, Mr. Mukherjee,

I went through the judgment that you have sent on PM. It was 227 CrPC not Article 227 of Indian Constitution. Sorry about my misunderstanding.

“de facto complainant tried to enter her matrimonial home, but she was not allowed and even the husband of de facto complainant throttled her” – The underlined circumstantial events are contradictory and the prima-facies of the said quotes are not chargeable on 307 IPC.

Reason is very simple, If she is not allowed to come on her matrimonial house by the accused party then how such offence can be committed.

I also noticed that the judge did not justify the reason why the prima-fancies is chargeable in 307  IPC as he had justified for other charges i.e 498A/506/406 in his order.

I also notice no-medical report from any government hospital has been collected/submitted by the IO as circumstantial as well as documentary evidence to fructify so that such offence has been committed by the accused husband.

I also notice the Investigation Officer (IO) did not collect/submit any mobile location trace report or any kind of documentary evidences so that it can be conclude that Jyotsna Chatterjee and Uttam Chatterjee who stay in Kanpur were present at the time of committing offences.

The judge also did not framed any fix time line as per sec. 21-B of Hindu Marriage Act so that the trial judge can conclude to dispose of the matter within such fixed timeframe.

Based on the above observation, I am in the view that 307 IPC can be quashed, Jyotsna Chatterjee and Uttam Chatterjee can be quashed from the entire cases and for the rest of the trail, fix 6 months timeline can be prayer in the Calcutta High Court.

Please appear in-person(Without Advocate). It will not take more than 2-3 weeks if you plead in-person. 

Respected members and for specially Rocky ji(bani babu),I'm very much thankful to you.

In the false F.I.R/CS -

1.no date/time

2.no injury

3.no witness of said place

4.no dowry demand

5.no 307

6.no mental/physical torture(vaugeness of mental)

7.no investigation by I.O(POLITICALLY BIASED)

 lost everything in this false case.

Trial court ordered prosecution to expedite the trial. In HC will end the case or will quash all the accuseds?Or if is it possible that HC might order again to trial in trial court?Is this not would be westage of time?Please suggest me.thank you very much.

The Best option is to go through the trial at District level. In such a case High court will not interfere the trial proceedings at District level usurping the power of trial court.Fight back with all the grounds that you have and wait for the trial court judgment, and only thereafter decide what will be the best for you. Justice require patient, so be patient.

Can i file a petition u/s 211 ipc against the complainant for filing false statement intent to injury

or thereafter the judgement u/s 340 for perjury  or defamation.

thank you very much

Mr. Assumi how much time will take to end the trial case ,whwreas court odreded prosecution to expedite the trial.Can i file any case for this wholly false case against op? op filed the case accompliances with local political culprits(1/2) and biased police.

I disagree with N.K.Assumi.

No advocate wishes to resolve your problem because their income is from your problem.

Being a Bengali, I expect that you at list have analytical brain to understand this point.

Some of the IPCs might be quashed however not all. You have to face the trial. HC will make fixed time frame which is helpful else your trial will reach to your funeral service.

One question to you, If no dowry demand in FIR then why in the judgment dowry demand is mentioned?

Thanks rocky smith for your inputs in disagreeing with my responds .But I once again reiterate  that high court in such case should not usurp the power of trial court, on disputed facts, by assuming the power of court of facts. Any disputed facts should be left with the trial Court and high court should not waste it's time with disputed facts.

Originally posted by : N.K.Assumi
	Thanks rocky smith for your inputs in disagreeing with my responds .But I once again reiterate  that high court in such case should not usurp the power of trial court, on disputed facts, by assuming the power of court of facts. Any disputed facts should be left with the trial Court and high court should not waste it's time with disputed facts.

Is this written in any of the CrPCs or HC rules? If yes, then please mention the same to forfeit your statement.   

It’s time to see the power of HC under 483 CrPC and Article 227 of Indian Constitution.

HC will definitely interfere if trial court abuses its power if litigants apply with proper determination and grounds.  

Mr, Bani babu ,I 'm very worried abt highest corruption In every espects.Today has no humanitarian ground,money and only money over all. We had not any demand of dowry,but 498A woman mentioned abt demand of dowry in FIR. IO also in CS ,and claimed some articles were seized(406).But no investigation, not a single day, was done by IO. The Other three witnesses lives at other place,near her parental house but they mentioned that they have only heard, but these witnesses did not say abt dawry in 161 cr.pc statement. There are no witness of the said place.Actually she stayed at her matrimonial home only a couple of days.

 Now I  want to know:1.mention date/time when the dowry was given to whom and whose presence? 2.is the said list,if any ,a valid 'streedhan' list as per rule 2 of DPA,1985? 3.Provide income tax returns,flow of money,bank statements & other pertaining to this items & receipts copy of that?4.why no witness supports the dowry allegation except op & her parents ? 5.Giving dowry is a cognizable offence under 3dpa 1961& there's a penalty of imprisonment upto five yrs.