Jayant Bhargava & Ors vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr on 26 August, 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 her counsel.
3. The factual matrix of the present case is that the marriage was

Crl.M.C. 1011/2016 Page 1 of 9
solemnized between petitioner no.1/accused no.1 and the
complainant/respondent no.2 on 21.11.2008 according to Hindu rites
and ceremonies. The accused persons were not satisfied with the
dowry as a result of which they started torturing the complainant from
the very first day of marriage. On 01.05.2010, the accused persons
allegedly forced the complainant to sign blank papers in order to use
them against her in future but the complainant refused to do so and
decided to leave the matrimonial house upon which the accused
persons retained all her jewellery and Honda city car she brought with
her as dowry and demanded two diamond sets for the sister-in-laws
and Rs. 5 Lacs.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply