Pinakin mahipatray rawal v state of

State of Gujarat 10 SCC 48, this Court, with reference to Section A of the Indian Evidence Act,while observing that the criminal law amendment bringing forth this provision was necessitated to meet the social challenge of saving the married woman from being ill-treated or forcing to commit suicide by the husband or his relatives demanding dowry, it was underlined that the burden of proving the preconditions permitting the presumption as ingrained therein, squarely and singularly lay on the prosecution.

Consequently, it cannot be said that A-2 had in any way contributed or abetted the deceased in committing the act of suicide, or had attempted to alienate the affection of A-1 towards his deceased wife. Another case of some importance is Dare Vs. He is in love with Priti Bhakt, serving in LIC and wants to marry her and, therefore, for their happiness, I am taking this step.

The seed of suspicion planted in mind brought the eventual tragedy. Kawaljit Kochar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Even mental torture or abnormal behavior may amount to cruelty or harassment in a given case. The police was thereafter informed. A-1 while working as a Field Officer in the Life Insurance Corporation of India came into contact with A-2, who was then unmarried and a colleague, working with him in the Corporation.

Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

No evidence is forthcoming in this case to show that A-2 ever evinced any interest to marry A Both the spouses have a valuable interest in the married relationship, including its intimacy, companionship, support, duties, affection, welfare of children etc.

We are not prepared to say that there was any willful or malicious interference by A-2 in the marital relationship between A-1 and the deceased. We have on facts found that A-2 has not intruded into the family life of A-1 and his deceased wife, and the Court on evidence acquitted A-2 of all the charges levelled against her.

Possibly, he might have caught up in a one-sided love affair with some liking towards A But for the alleged extra marital relationship, which if proved, could be illegal and immoral, nothing has been brought out by the prosecution to show that the accused had provoked, incited or induced the wife to commit suicide.

If there is any justice in this cultured and democratic society then at least my in-laws should be punished after our death and every common man should get justice.


I also love him. Prosecution story is that the intimacy between A-1 and A-2 developed years prior to that and, of course, if the intimacy or relationship between A-1 and A-2 was so strong, then A-2 would not have got married in November, State of Maharashtra, 5 SCCexamined the scope of the explanation and held as follows: Parents of the deceased also did not make any allegation against A-1 of ill-treatment of wife or of dowry demand.

The witness thereafter along with his wife knocked the door of the apartment of the deceased, but there was no response. In course of the inquisition, the Investigating Officer collected a suicide note in the handwriting of Surjit Kaur and also subscribed to by her daughter Preet Bahul.

In cross-examination, the witness mentioned that all the three deceased used to remain dejected and depressed. Whereas Satnam Kaur died during the committal proceedings, charge was framed against the remaining accused persons namely; Gurcharan Singh appellantAjit Kaur and Sukhvinder Singh Goldy under the aforementioned provisions of the Code.

Under Section 41A of Cr PC notice of appearance should be served on the accused and it should be done within 2 weeks from institution of the case in writing. But such an event will not constitute the offence or establish the guilt of the accused-appellant under Section of the IPC.

The facts in this case have clearly proved that the A-1 has not ill-treated the deceased, either physically or mentally demanding dowry and was living with A-1, in the matrimonial home till the date, she committed suicide.

As the facts would unveil, the husband gets acquitted for the offence under Section IPC but convicted in respect of other two charges by the trial court. Offence under Section a shall be compoundable and non-bailable but it should be observed with the conditions of Section 41 and 41A of Cr PC.

Courts below, in our view, have committed serious error in holding that it was due to the extra marital relationship A-1 had with A-2 that led the deceased to take the extreme step to commit suicide, and A-1 was instrumental for the said act.

In this regard, we may reproduce a passage from Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal supra: Though a presumption could be drawn, the burden of proof of showing that such an offence has been committed by the accused under Section A IPC is on the prosecution. Courts below, in our view, have committed serious error in holding that it was due to the extra marital relationship A-1 had with A-2 that led the deceased to take the extreme step to commit suicide, and A-1 was instrumental for the said act.

Slightly recently in Ghusabhai Raisangbhai Chorasiya v. To constitute an offence under Sectionthe prosecution has to establish that a person has committed suicide and the suicide was abetted by the accused.

Barring the aforesaid, there is no whisper with regard to any kind of ill-treatment or cruel behaviour by the husband. (v) (vi) the defendant to pay interest on decretal amount from the date of filing of suit - Payment of interest from the date of filing of suit before court of.

LawyerServices Members' Log In. Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal v/s State of Gujarat Criminal Appeal No of Decided On, 09 September At, Supreme Court of India By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE.

Mere extra-marital relationship, even if proved, would be illegal and immoral, as has been said in Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal (supra), but it would take a different character if the prosecution brings some evidence on record to show that the accused had conducted in such a manner to drive the wife to commit suicide.

Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal vs State Of Gujarat on 9 September, Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.  Davis v. The State of Georgia: Sentencing and Appeals Eugene Berry 5/5/15 Crj Week 3 Assignment 2 In the case of The State of Georgia v.

Troy Davis on the date of august 28, Troy Davis was claimed guilty by jury after two hours. Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal v.

Husband’s extra- marital relationship does not amount to cruelty

State of Gujarat, () 10 SCC 48 Criminal Law Penal Code, Ss. A and - Cruelty" under S. A - Meaning and scope - Alleged extramarital relationship of husband with.

Pinakin mahipatray rawal v state of
Rated 0/5 based on 3 review
Husband’s extra- marital relationship does not amount to cruelty | SCC Blog