false 498a case
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 31 October 2009
This query is : Resolved
498a filed in 2003, wife falsely alleges that the husband beat her in a paying guest apartment where she was staying , police size the articles like fridge washing machine etc form husbands house and book a case, husband sent to judicial custody for 6 days. The IO ( police ) registers the false case.
Husband wins the interim custody of articles by producing credit card bills and the wife does not challenge the interim order.
Wife also files a false case of divorce citing the 498a case where the address of the PG is given.
Now all complainant witness examined and the defense witness is the owner of the apartment where the alleged incident took place. In fornt of the court the apartment owner says he never ran any PG accomodation, he does not know the police filed a case and his house address is used and he does not know the complainant ( wife)
Final arguments are pending.
Questions:
1) Is it malicious persecution, giving false evidence, common intent etc?
2) criminal conspiracy by the wife, witnesses and police against the accused
3) As the address and the events of assault at the apartments have no standing because the apartment owner has come to court and said they are false.
4) Does IPC 120. Concealing design to commit offence punishable with imprisonment apply
5) Does Section 182 in The Indian Penal Code - False information, with intent to cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person apply
6) Does Section 196 in The Indian Penal Code - Using evidence known to be false apply
7) Does IPC 201 Causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender
8) Does IPC 211 False charge of offence made with intent to injure apply
9) Does IPC 218 - Public servant framing incorrect record or writing with intent to save person from punishment or property from forfeiture apply on police
10) Does IPC 327 - Voluntarily causing hurt to extort property, or to constrain to an illegal to an act.
11) Does IPC 347 - Wrongful confinement to extort property, or constrain to illegal act.
12) Does IPC 355 - Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour person, otherwise than on grave provocation apply
13) Does IPC 420 - Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property apply
14) Does IPC 424 - Dishonest or fraudulent removal or concealment of property.
15) Can IPC 500 - Punishment for defamation.-- Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
16) Does PIC 343 - Wrongful confinement for three or more days.-- Whoever wrongfully confines any person for three days or more, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
17) Does IPC 177 - Furnishing false information apply
Please help if you have any judgments and what relief can I ask for to the court as the trail ran for 6 years on this false allegation which can be proved beyond reasonable doubt by the strength of the flat owners statement. I just need your expert second opnion.
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 31 October 2009
You have to argue to bring the above said offences into action, because in a judgement always like this accused is acquitted because of lack of evidences and complainant failed proved the offence beyond reasonsable doubts.
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 31 October 2009
kindly it may be read as prosecution instead of complainant.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 31 October 2009
1. before decision of the case, no one can say it is malicious prosecution. Let the case decided in your favour in the given circumstances.
2. Same answer as above.
3. No quarry raised at serial no. 3
4. Same as answered at Sr. no. 1 above.
5. Yes it applies but cannot be applied untill case is decided in your favour.
6. Same answer as given at Sr. no. 5 above.
7 to 17. all sections at given by you in particular serial no.s apply in your case subject to favourable findings of the court in this regard.
yogesh
(Expert) 31 October 2009
It is regret to say that despite of all the sections of the IPC is listed doesn't apply as vigour as 498A is
Because the 498A is itself is terror law which itself has been cited by the Hon'ble Apex court.
The sections cited you will give little relief to the husband as onus is on him to prove the allegations
Regards
