SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sohan Lal & Ors vs State & Anr on 12 September, 2017

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2670 / 2011

1. Sohan Lal son of Late Shri Durga Shanker,

2. Om Prakash Sharma son of Shri Sohan Lal Sharma,

3. Vijai Kumar son of Shri Sohan Lal

4. Kamlesh son of Shri Sohan Lal
All residents of 24 Jaishri Colony, Dhulkot Road, Udaipur.


1. State of Rajasthan through P.P.

2. Shrimati Vijay Laxmi wife of Shri Om Prakash daughter of Shri
Rewa Shanker, Resident of Rani Station, Rani District Pali

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ranjeet Singh for Mr. Pradeep Shah
For Respondent(s) : Mr. K.K. Rawal, PP
Mr. Mahaveer Bishnoi

1. The petitioners have preferred this criminal misc.

petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated

14.09.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bali

whereby he has dismissed the criminal revision petition

No.38/2009 and affirmed the order dated 29.08.2006 passed by

the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) and Judicial Magistrate,

First Class, Desuri by which he has taken the cognizance against

the petitioner No.1 under Section 406 IPC and against the

petitioners No.2 to 4 under Section 406/34 of IPC.

(2 of 2)

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has

stated that in the earlier statement made by the complainant

under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she had stated that she has received

the amount and articles of dowry and further, the offence under

Section 406 IPC against the petitioner No.1 and Section 406/34

IPC against the petitioner No.2 to 4 is not made out.

3. However, on bare perusal of the impugned orders, it is

clear that both the learned courts below have considered the facts

of the case at length including the precedent law and

contemplated that on bare examination of the evidence collected

by the prosecution, prima facie case against the petitioners is

made out. This Court also agrees to the propositions laid down by

two consecutive courts below and hence, no ground for

interference is made.

4. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2024 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation