Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“To convict the accused under Section 363 IPC, two things are to be established beyond reasonable doubt, one that she was below the age of 18 years and other would be that she was taken away from her lawful guardianship without consent of the guardians.”
The Court directed the State to requisition and submit the case diary and relevant documents before the next date of hearing.
“Sanction of the Government, to prosecute a public officer, for any act related to the discharge of official duty, is imperative to protect the public officer from facing harassive, retaliatory, revengeful, and frivolous proceedings.”
The Court stated that when considering the material produced, it appears improbable that the accused persons’ visit to the police station was solely to fabricate evidence.
The proceeding u/s 125 CrPC. is summary in nature in which only prima facie it has to be seen that the applicant is the wife of opposite party. It is a social legislation enacted for protecting the wife, minor children, and parents of a person from vagrancy and destitution.
Even if the proceeding was ex-parte against the petitioner, still the required affidavit was to be filed by the wife so as to find out her assets/liabilities/source of income etc.
Kerala High Court: While dismissing the criminal revision petition challenging the order passed by Lower Court, Kauser Edappagath, J. held
Karnataka High Court: John Michael Cunha J., while rejecting the present criminal revision petition, elaborated on scope and ambit of Section 397
Rajasthan High Court: Vijay Bishnoi, J., allowed a criminal revision petition seeking to set aside judgments convicting the petitioner with regard to
Allahabad High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Rajeev Misra, J., dealt with this petition which was filed under Article 227
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J., decided a criminal revision petition filed under Sections