Upgrad LLM

clarification for ipc 406

nil

I have a query where my mother’s stridhan access is being stopped by my chacha.

Such cases where a husband or relative retains a womans’ ornaments falls ideally under IPC 406. But courts have added a big question mark.

 

“In order that an offence under Section 405 IPC is committed two elements are essential, namely, entrustment with property or dominion over any property and dishonest misappropriation or conversion to his own use or dishonest disposal of such property.” Most of the courts refuse to prosecute an accused even when the accused has forced possession of a woman’s stridhan.

 

Courts refuse to put charge of IPC 406 stating that the accused has not converted the ornaments or disposed the ornaments for his use. In such a confusing situation, on what grounds of IPC can a woman claim her stridhan if accused refuses to give. IPC 406 is complete as per the corts only when two conditions are satisfied, but can a woman be left in trouble on these grounds ?

 

Please advise.

 
Reply   
 

Mrs.divya earlier supreme court sited that sridhana is the her own property. In which way accused misuse her property. You file private complaint U/S 420, 506 and 406.
 
Reply   
 



Actually anticipatory bail is stands until dispose of case. Unless mention the condition in order copy. Softer getting bail you should face trail. And you and your mother have to satisfy the court how the accused misuse the sridhana
 
Reply   
 
08010117611

Basically the women whose ornaments have been retained by the accused forcibly. In this situation the following points have been raised :-

01.      Whether the ornaments were snatched and retained

02        Whether the ornaments were just refused to hand over and has been retained

03       Whether the ornaments were given by the women to the accused and later on he refused that the same has been used or sell

04       Whether the ornaments were just retained on account of dissolution amongst the family members

 

the situation in the circumstance are different, therefore, it call civil and criminal cases as case may be. you did not clear in your question in which circumstance he stopped the istridhan of your mother. Therefore, the question is not being answered

Rgds

 
Reply   
 
nil

Hello Sir,

its option (2)..i replace the word ORNAMENTS with LOCKER-KEYS...pls let me know if any further inputs r needed.

 
Reply   
 
Advocate

Dear Divya,

As Advocate Deepak Kapoor rightly pointed out, you have not clearly made out the circumstances of your case, instead you have come out with another querry with no head or tail; hence be clear in what you want to clarify or the relief sought for

 
Reply   
 
nil

Sir,

the issue is my uncle has retained my mother's locker-keys since several years...Locker has my mother's gold & she is also the owner as per RBI, Banl policies etc.....After waiting for so long, i filed a private complaint and one of the sections put was IPC 406 & the judge dismissed it saying that "uncle has not converted the property to his use" and the offence is not complete as he hasnt misappropriated the property.....

 

Hence i had put this query.....IPC 406 deals with 2 parts....first is retain property & second part is property is converted or disposed off .....Thatz where i had put the query, because the acused has retained the locker-keys he is supposed to give it back to the lawful owner but he does not. Hence only option is "IPC 406""  but the law provision backfires.

 

Thankyou

 
Reply   
 
08010117611

As per your query it is civil case. No offense u/s 406 is made out. further if your mother is owner of the locker then she is entitle to get the other key from banker or as they have to take the necessary step after completion of Banker formalities.

The good sense is prevail upon you

Rgds

 
Reply   
 
Social activist and ESIS Legal Consultant (everysufferer isasaviour@gmail.com)

Agree with Mr.Kapoor....

 
Reply   
 
nil

yes i agree with the views of experts...

 

My main cross-question is :

There are 1000's of 406 cases filed by women when husband and inlaws retain the woman's property (stridhan)..That retainment is criminal & it comes under IPC 406 & entire police & judicial force supports it.

What is the difference in my state....Here im saying that accused has kept my mother's bank locker-keys with him & this locker has my mother's stridhan..I have all evidences to prove my mother's ownership of locker-contents..

Why is there a difference in tackling other 406 stridhan cases & my cases....I would appreciate if i get to know reasons of logical disconnect between the two cases.

 

Thankyou

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

  Search Forum








×

Menu

CrPC MASTERCLASS!     |    x