Bail Applicant Under Mandatory Obligation To Disclose Criminal Antecedents, Non-Disclosure Results In Erroneous Decisions: Andhra Pradesh High Court Judicial Decrees Cannot Be Set Aside By Administrative Orders After Decades; Long-Standing Revenue Entries Must Be Protected: Allahabad High Court 'Any Use Whatsoever' Includes Promotion & Events: Bombay High Court Restrains New Indian Express Group From Hosting Commercial Events Outside Southern States Reserved Category Candidates Who Qualify On Their Own Seniority Must Be Adjusted Against Unreserved Vacancies: Calcutta High Court Decree For Possession Can Be Passed If Landlord-Tenant Relationship & Termination Are Admitted; Unregistered Lease Is Month-To-Month: Delhi High Court Prosecution Against Co-Accused Not Sustainable When Main Accused Is Discharged On Same Facts: Jharkhand High Court Admission Of Handwriting On Account Statement Is Not Admission Of Its Contents; Corroborative Evidence Necessary To Prove Claim: Gujarat High Court Omission Of Label Defects In Food Inspector's Spot Memo Fatal To Prosecution For Misbranding: Himachal Pradesh High Court RBI Must Consult State Government, Not Just Registrar, To Supersede Co-operative Bank Board; Principles Of Natural Justice Excluded Under Section 36AAA: Kerala High Court Suit Filed Before IBC Proceedings Cannot Be Dismissed Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC; Section 96 Moratorium Only Stays Pending Actions: Calcutta High Court Senior Citizens Not Technologically Savvy Cannot Be Penalized For Not Checking Case Status On Court Website: Tripura High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Case Against CM Revanth Reddy Over 2019 Election Roadshow, Cites Bar Under Section 195 CrPC Maintenance Tribunal Orders Passed Without Mandated Three-Member Coram Are A Nullity: Punjab & Haryana High Court School Register Entry Regarding Date Of Birth Lacks Probative Value Unless Source Of Information Is Proved: Madhya Pradesh High Court Sets Aside POCSO Conviction Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Will | Disinheriting Caring Spouse In Favour Of Non-Relatives Is An ‘Unnatural Disposition’ Raising Grave Suspicion: Supreme Court Registration Does Not Automatically Validate Will If Process Is Shrouded In Suspicion; Testator's Illiteracy Increases Burden On Propounder: Supreme Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court

Delhi High Court Upholds Discharge of Respondents in Marital Harassment Case, Orders Re-Examination of Prosecution Witnesses

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, has upheld the discharge of respondents No. 2 and 3 in a case involving allegations of marital harassment and dowry demands. However, the Court has set aside the orders relating to the dropping and discharge of prosecution witnesses, directing their re-examination.

The case, registered as FIR No. 130/2012 at Police Station Mianwali Nagar, Delhi, pertains to allegations made by petitioner Bhawna Grover against her husband’s family, including respondents No. 2 and 3. The petitioner accused them of substantial dowry demands and continuous harassment post her marriage in 2001.

Justice Sharma, in her judgment, noted, “It is unbelievable that despite the order being uploaded on the website of the district court concerned, and despite petitioner and her counsel being present before the learned Mahila Court on several dates, she was not aware as to what order on charge had been passed in the present case.” This observation was made in reference to the delay in challenging the order discharging respondents No. 2 and 3.

Justice Sharma stated, “The victim has a right to prove the contents of the complaints and the fact that complaints were made with certain content on certain dates, which may be crucial to prove her case during the course of trial.” This statement highlights the court’s emphasis on ensuring a fair trial and the proper presentation of evidence.

The Court also addressed the grievances regarding the handling of prosecution witnesses. The judgment reads, “The victim has a right to prove the contents of the complaints and the fact that complaints were made with certain content on certain dates, which may be crucial to prove her case during the course of trial.” Consequently, the Court set aside the order dated 29.03.2023, which had erroneously dropped two prosecution witnesses and discharged PW-2 without a reasonable cause.

Date of Decision: 30.01.2024

BHAWNA GROVER VS STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS

Latest Legal News