Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Calcutta High Court: Stridhan Recovery and Gifted Money Claims Evaluated

07 May 2024 2:49 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