Dear Experts and fellow members
Kindly Go thru the extrats of my judgment and advice what cases can i i file.
In the present case it was the case of prosecution that after few days of the solemnization of marriage of complainant, all the accused started demanding Rs. 1 lacs from the complainant and on such demand the father of the complainant delivered the amount of Rs. 70,000/- However, this allegation of prosecution has become doubtful as in the cross-examination, father of the complainant admitted that he arranged the amount of Rs. 70,000/- from one Mohinder Singh.However, the other prosecution witness PW-4 stated in his cross-examination that amount of Rs. 70,000/- was paid by him to complainant's father for the purpose of giving the same to accused .
Further the complainant alleged that accused person used to gave beatings to her. She deposed in her examination-in-chief that one day, accused person try to give her tablets of SALPHUS to eat. The allegations of complainant has not been proved as different versions
accrued regarding the consumption of SALPHUS tablets by the prosecution witnesses. Complainant in her examination-in-chief alleged that accused brought SALPHUS Tablets and all the accused persons tried to give her the SALPHUS tablets. However, PW4- when stepped into witness box deposed that the accused gave SALPHUS tablets to her and accused , husband of complainant gave two SALPHUS tablets to the complainant in his presence and the presence of her father. The third version forward came in the testimony of PW6- , father of the complainant who deposed that the accused person gave SALPHUS tablets to the complainant but somehow she was saved and he came to her in-laws place after her daughter, the complainant made a telephonic call. It is very strange that accused person would give “SALPHUS” tablets to complainant in front of her father or PW4 . The prosecution thus totally failed to establish on record, date, month and year when this occurrence of alleged giving of theSALPHUS tablets to complainant. Prosecution itself failed to clear facts whether SALPHUS tablets was ever given or tried to be given as alleged to the complainant. The complainant herself deposed that they tried to give salfas tablets on the other hand the witnessPW4 stated that the tablets were consumed by the complainant and she got bluish.This witness have even gone further to an extent that the accused gave the tablets to the accused in front of Him and her father.
The allegations of prosecution that accused person were not allowing the complainant to use the land line telephone or any cellphone to converse with her father and other family members and they used to beat her up whenever she used to call her parents. However these
allegations had again become doubtful as in cross-examination of father, he admitted that he used to call her daughter on landline phone occasionally. Moreover it has come on record in the deposition of father of complainant that after the incident of consumption of salphus tablets he
received telephone call from her daughter. It is very strange that complainant could have used landline phone for informing her father regarding the abovesaid incident inspite of the restrictions put by the accused persons as alleged. . Moreover, there are material contradiction regarding the use of the land line phone in the deposition of complainant and deposition of her father in cross-examination. Moreover, it has been established on record as admitted by complainant, in her cross-examination that she had some kidney stone problems in the month of August 2003 and she was examined in Miglani Hospital, Meaning thereby of in the month of August 2003, she was given medical treatment by the accused persons then the story of the prosecution that she was subjected to cruelty soon after the marriage become doubtful.
Therefore in the present case to fulfill the ingredients of 498A there is no material evidence which could establish the case against the accused. Prosecution had been even failed to prove any circumstantial evidence of cruelity against the accused what to say about the direct
cruelity.
Thanks
