CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2005) 07 DEL CK 0116

Smt. Bhawani Devi and Another vs State

Delhi High Court · Decided on 25 July 2005 · Citation: (2005) 122 DLT 396 : (2005) 2 DMC 330 : (2005) 83 DRJ 688

HON’BLE JUDGES
R.S. Sodhi, J
CASE NUMBER
CRLR 305 and 306 of 2005

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 341 words

R.S. Sodhi, J.

Crl.M.A.4190/2005:

1.

Allowed subject to just exceptions. Application disposed of.

Crl.Rev.P.305-306/2005 and Crl. M.A. 4191/2005:

2.

Crl. Rev. P. 305-306/2005 are directed against the order dated 04.3.2005 of the Additional Sessions Judge, whereby the learned Judge has framed charge u/s 498-A read with Section 34 IPC and Section 304-B IPC read with Section 34 IPC against the petitioners on the basis of the statement of Tara Dutt and Bhagirathi Devi.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there is nothing on record to show that the mother-in-law or the sister-in-law have committed any acts of cruelty and/or are responsible for the death of the deceased Radha @ Rukma.

4.

Counsel has taken me through the statements of Sh. Tara Dutt s/o Sh. Keshav Dutt, Smt. Nandi Devi, Smt. Bhagirathi Devi as also the statement of Bansidhar.

5.

From a reading of the aforesaid statements there is no iota of evidence to show that either the mother-in-law or sister-in-law had treated the deceased with cruelty or had any hand in her death. The statements made before the police, also the supplementary statements, do not lead to any inference with any of the petitioners herein, namely, the mother-in-law or sister-in-law, being involved in an offence u/s 498-A or 304-B IPC.

6.

The learned trial court in its order dated 04.03.2005 while making a reference to the statement of Shri Tara Dutt and Smt.Bhagirathi Devi and other evidence on record appears to have not applied its mind to the requirements of Section 498-A or 304-B IPC.

7.

Having gone through the material on record as also the statements and with the assistance of counsel for the parties, I am satisfied that no offence has been committed by Smt. Bhawani Devi, W/o Late Shri L.D. Tiwari and Smt.Pushpa, D/o Late Shri L.D. Tiwari.

8.

Consequently, I discharge both the petitioners of the offence under Sections 498-A/304-B IPC and allow Crl. Rev.P. Nos. 305-306/2005 setting aside the order qua them. The petitions are disposed of. Crl. M.A. 4191/2005 also stands disposed of.