Partly allowed

Jagat Singh v. Naresh Kumar Verma

Chhattisgarh HC4 Aug 2016CRMP/658/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge of Chhattisgarh High Court allowed a Criminal Reference application under Section 372 Cr.P.C. filed by the father of a deceased wife, granting leave to appeal against the acquittal of her husband for dowry-related suicide allegations while dismissing the petition against other accused.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Reference application allowed against respondent No. 1 (husband); leave to prefer acquittal appeal granted; notice issued for regular appeal; coercive steps mentioned under Section 390 Cr.P.C

Jagat Singh Vs Naresh Kumar Verma — Matrimonial and Divorce | Chhattisgarh HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRMP No. 658 of 2016

¶5

Jagat Singh S/O Mohan Singh Aged About 51 Years R/O Village Baghmarra, Out Post Jalbandha, Police Station Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh (Aggrieved Party And Father Of Deceased). ---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Naresh Kumar Verma S/O Goverdhan Prasad Verma Aged About 26 Years R/O Village Hiretara, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶8

Goverdhan Prasad Verma S/O Late Choparam Verma Aged About 50 Years R/O Village Hiretara, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶9

Smt. Bhagwati Bai W/O Goverdhan Prasad Verma Aged About 50 Years R/O Village Hiretara, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Dorelal Verma S/O Goverdhan Verma Aged About 29 Years R/O Village Hiretara, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶11

Smt. Sarswati Verma W/O Dorelal Verma Aged About 25 Years R/O Village Hiretara, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶12

Shiv Shankar @ Shiv Kumar Verma S/O Goverdhan Prasad Verma Aged About 21 Years R/O Village Hiretara, Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶13

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh (Prosecution). ---- Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner/applicant : Shri Rakesh Pandey, Advocate For Respondents No.7 : Shri Vivek Sharma, Government Advocate

¶15

HON'BLE SHIR JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE CHANDRA BHUSHAN BAJPAI

¶16

Order On Board

¶17

04/08/2016

¶18

In this application under Section 372 of the Cr.P.C., the applicant, who is the father of the deceased – Lileshwari Bai Chandel, has sought leave to prefer appeal against acquittal of the respondents of charges under Section 304-B/34 or in the alternative Section 306/34 of the I.P.C.

¶19

Leleshwari was married with respondent No.1 – Naresh Kumar on

¶20

¶21

05.05.2011. She committed suicide by consuming poison on 18.11.2013 in her matrimonial home.

¶22

The trial Judge has recorded a finding in paragraph 22 that the demand of amount of Rs.75,000/- was made by respondent No.1 – Naresh Kumar in connection with or in relation to marriage. It has also been held that sometimes in the month of May 2013, respondent No.1 / husband against demanded Rs.40,000/-, which was not meted out by the applicant, i.e., father of the deceased. Despite the said finding, the trial judge has acquitted respondent No.1 on the ground that there is no evidence that the death occurred only account of demand of Rs.40,000/- or the cruelty/assault made by the said respondent in May, 2013.

¶23

Having considered the evidence available on record, we are of considered view that the application deserves to be allowed in respect of acquittal of respondent No.1. In so far as non-applicants/respondents No. 2 to 6 are concerned, there is no reliable evidence available against them about their involvement in demand of money or assaulting the deceased in the month of May, 2013.

¶24

In view of the above, Cr.M.P. is allowed only against respondent No.1 and leave to prefer acquittal appeal against said respondent No.1 is granted.

¶25

Let regular appeal be registered against respondent No.1 and notice there of be issued to him, on payment of P.F. as per rules.

¶26

It is made clear that if respondent No.1 fails to appear before this Court, coercive steps shall be taken to secure his appearance before this Court in terms of Section 390 of the Cr.P.C.

¶27

Sd/Sd/Judge Judge ( Prashant Kumar Mishra ) ( Chandra Bhushan Bajpai )

¶28

Anjani

Jagat Singh v. Naresh Kumar Verma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagat Singh v. Naresh Kumar Verma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bodwa Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Kamla Bai Vs Set Kumar and Another

Anil Khandelwal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Satrupa Prajapati Vs Shri Gopal Prasad Prajapati

Jageshwar Prasad Devangan Vs Smt. Kunti Bai

State Of Chhattisgarh Vs Shyamu @ Shyamsundar