17. On an analysis of the evidence, both oral and documentary, and on hearing the learned counsel for both sides at length, according to me the order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellants for commission of offences under Sections 498-A and 4 D.P. Act cannot be sustained in the absence of any cogent evidence regarding ‘torture’ or ‘harassment’ to the victim woman vis-a-vis demand of dowry and the same is to be set aside and the appeal is bound to succeed.
Benumadhab Padhi Mohapatra vs State on 28 August, 2003 HC of Orissa

- Post published:December 16, 2021
- Post category:498A
- Post comments:0 Comments
- Post last modified:December 16, 2021
You Might Also Like

Sushil Kumar Sharma Versus Union of India in Supreme Court 19 July, 2005 SC Writ Petition Civ. 141 of 2005

Shobhnaben Chelshankar Shukla vs. Shekhar Sharad Prabhakar Vyas on 02 Dec 2010 HC of Gujarat
