Supreme Court Lays Down Comprehensive Guidelines To Prevent Misuse Of POCSO Act In Matrimonial Disputes Land Reforms Act | Joint Application For Pre-Emption By Adjoining Landowners Is Maintainable: Calcutta High Court Ocular Evidence In Conflict With Medical Findings Or Withholding Of Natural Witnesses Vitiates Prosecution Case: Allahabad High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Must Be Decided Based On Policy Prevalent At Time Of Death: Bombay High Court Section 376 IPC | Failure To Prove Initial Dishonest Intent In Marriage Promise Renders Sexual Relationship Consensual: Allahabad High Court Prolonged Incarceration And Delay In Trial Are Valid Grounds To Invoke Constitutional Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 In UAPA Cases: Delhi High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Insurer Liable To Pay And Recover Compensation For Gratuitous Passengers In Goods Vehicles: Gujarat High Court Proof Of Demand And Acceptance Under PC Act Must Be Evaluated Based On Preponderance Of Probabilities In Rebuttal: Kerala High Court Tenancy Claim | Mere Possession Without Lawful Foundation Or Identification Of Tenanted Land Cannot Confer Occupancy Rights: Karnataka High Court 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Evaded By Claiming Physical Disability If Conduct Indicates Concealment Of Financial Means: Kerala High Court M.P. Municipal Corporation Act | Locus Standi Under Section 307(5) Limited To Residents Of The Municipal Area: Madhya Pradesh High Court Writ Jurisdiction | Belated Challenge To Disciplinary Action After Superannuation Amounts To Laches; Petition Dismissed: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC | Mere Pendency Of Partition Suit Does Not Entitle Plaintiff To Injunction Restraining Reconstruction Of Residential Building: Kerala High Court Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Section 482 CrPC | High Court Quashes FIR Following Private Compromise In Non-Heinous Dispute Arising From Civil Conflict Mere Involvement In Criminal Case Does Not Constitute Moral Turpitude To Deny Public Appointment: Telangana High Court Pendency Of Investigation Cannot Be A Blanket Ground To Deny Permission For Foreign Travel: Rajasthan High Court Fraudulent Representation By Counsel Vitiates Ex Parte Decree: Punjab & Haryana High Court Holds Professional Misconduct As Evidence Of Fraud Writ Jurisdiction | Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Pending Criminal And Departmental Proceedings Renders Petition Liable To Dismissal: Orissa High Court Banking Fraud | Failure Of Bank Official To Conduct Physical Inspection Of Collateral Property Constitutes Criminal Conspiracy And Abuse Of Official Position: Madras High Court Fraud Vitiates Judicial Proceedings: Judgment Obtained Through Misrepresentation And Conflict Of Interest Cannot Be Sustained, Holds Punjab And Haryana High Court Discovery Under Section 27 Evidence Act From Publicly Accessible Place Requires Caution: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Articles At Instance Of Accused Without Independent Corroboration Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court DNA Profile Must Be Supported By Other Conclusive Evidence To Prove Guilt: Supreme Court

Calcutta High Court: Stridhan Recovery and Gifted Money Claims Evaluated

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court, comprising Justices Partha Sarathi Chatterjee and Tapabrata Chakraborty, delivered a meticulous judgment shedding light on the intricacies of stridhan recovery and claims regarding gifted money. The court meticulously examined the evidence and legal aspects surrounding the case, offering valuable insights into the application of legal principles.

The judgment, which delves into the realms of civil law, revolves around a dispute involving the recovery of stridhan articles and money gifted for specific purposes. The Honorable Bench's observations in this case have brought forth important insights into the interpretation of legal provisions and the distinction between civil and criminal proceedings.

In the observations, Justice Partha Sarathi Chatterjee highlighted the importance of evaluating evidence meticulously, stating, "Witnesses are of three types, namely, wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, and neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. In the first two, conclusions may be arrived at by accepting or rejecting evidence, but in the case of the third, the court has to be circumspect and look for corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony, direct or circumstantial."

Furthermore, Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty emphasized the need for careful consideration of evidence's consistency, stating, "The evidence of PW-1 is not consistent to the full extent. Her evidence relating to ornaments has not found support in evidence of PW-2, and there is no documentary evidence to corroborate the evidence of PW-1. In cross-examination, her evidence has been shaken to some extent."

The judgment addressed the application of Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as well as the provisions of Sections 3, 91, and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The court explored the concept of constructive res judicata and the impact of evidence in different legal proceedings, drawing on legal precedents to elucidate its conclusions.

Honourable Bench set aside part of the decree and dismissed a cross-objection, allocating costs accordingly. The court provided comprehensive guidelines for decree issuance and the transmission of records.

Date of Decision: 11 August 2023

Sanjay Pareek & Ors. vs Smt. Madhushree Sharma (Pareek)       

Latest Legal News