Atul Verma vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 10 November, 2016

2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State
submitted that the respondent No.2, present in the Court has been
identified to be the complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question
by ASI Devendra.
3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the marriage was
solemnized between petitioner/husband of the complainant and the
complainant/respondent no.2 on 17.11.2009. On 04.09.2010 daughter
named Kanishka was born out of the said wedlock. It is alleged by the
complainant that her in-laws would torture her on several occasions

Crl.M.C. 2416/2016 Page 1 of 8
for dowry and money and that her husband was having illicit relations
with another woman. It is alleged that on 11.08.2011, the complainant
had gone to her parental home for two weeks on the festival of Rakhi
and when she informed her parents about all the abuse and torture she
was being subjected to at her matrimonial home, the complainant’s
brother had a heated argument with her brother-in-laws. It is alleged
that after such altercation, the complainant was not allowed to enter
her matrimonial home by her husband.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply