Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Madhya Pradesh High Court noted that wife compelling the husband to do household chores, not preparing food on time, going to the market for shopping purposes, etc., are trivial dispute within domestic life.
The accused allegedly goaded the deceased to make an affidavit denying his signature in a particular document and suicide was committed under the threat to retract the statement.
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Vikas Bahl, J., granted bail to mother-in-law and wife alleged to have incited husband to commit suicide.
Madras High Court: V Bharathidasan, J., held that, Mere harassment without any mens rea which lead to the suicide would not amount
“How an individual copes up with a threat- both physical and emotional, expressing (or refraining to express) love, loss, sorrow and happiness, varies greatly in view of the multi-faceted nature of the human mind and emotions.”
‘Abetment’ involves mental process of instigating a person or intentionally aiding a person in doing of a thing.
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose, JJ., while addressing a matter noted that, Abetment by a person
Orissa High Court: S. K Panigrahi, J., allowed the bail application and remarked “There is no answer as to why suicides occur
Supreme Court: In a case relating to dowry death, the bench of NV Ramana*, CJ and Aniruddha Bose, J has said that
“When the legislature used the words, “soon before” they did not mean “immediately before”. Rather, they left its determination in the hands of the courts.”
Allahabad High Court: Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J., while discussing abetment of suicide, stated that: “…if some act either of omission or commission
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of V.M. Deshpande and Anil S. Kilor, JJ., held that if the prosecution fails prima facie to
Gujarat High Court: Gita Gopi, J., while addressing an issue with regard to abetment to suicide held that in accordance with the ingredients
Bombay High Court: K.R. Shriram, J., while deciding the appeal filed impugning the order and judgment passed with regard to acquittal for
Bombay High Court: K.R. Shriram, J., while upholding the decision of the trial court with regard to the acquittal of the accused,
Bombay High Court: K.K. Sonawane, J., allowed an appeal filed against the order of the trial court whereby the appellant was convicted
Bombay High Court: K.R. Shriram, J., dismissed an appeal filed against the order of the trial court whereby it had acquitted of the
Karnataka High Court: K.N. Phaneendra, J. allowed the criminal petition filed under Section 438 of The Code for Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking
Kerala High Court: R. Narayana Pisharadi, J. allowed a petition filed by bank official praying for quashing proceedings initiated against him for
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. dismissed a criminal revision petition filed against the order of the trial court whereby charge under Section