Sun. Jan 24th, 2021

Rupinder Kaur vs State & Ors. on 13 January, 2016

2 min read

1. The petitioner is the estranged wife of accused Jasbir Singh,
respondent No.2. She has challenged the order dated 01.05.2013
passed by the learned Trial Court in connection with Sessions Case
No.491/1/13 arising out of FIR No.214/2012 (P.S.Tilak Nagar)
instituted for offences under Sections 307/498A/406/34 of the IPC,
whereby the charge under Section 307 against the respondents has
been dropped and charges under Sections 406/498A and 34 of the IPC
has been framed against the respondents.
2. The petitioner was married to the respondent No.2 in the year
2011 but after sometime the relationship between the spouses became
strained on account of demand of further dowry. The petitioner is said

Crl.Rev P No.363/2013 Page 1 of 6
to have maintained reticence for quite some time in the hope that the
situation would normalize. The major and the immediate cause of
lodging of the FIR was an incident which occurred on 30.05.2012
when the petitioner was ill and had asked her husband for providing
money for medicines. The petitioner is said to have been abused and
ill treated. At about 9.45 PM, on the same day, when respondent No.2
was asked for medicine again by the petitioner, respondent No.2 is
alleged to have poured a bottle of kerosene oil over her head and
assaulted her. The petitioner is stated to have run out of the room and
fell down on the floor. The mother-in-law, who was having a match
box in her hand, came at the place where the petitioner had fallen
down. Sensing serious trouble, the petitioner is said to have ran out in
the streets and called her father. It is stated that the police reached
after sometime and the petitioner was sent to the hospital for medical
treatment. She had sustained injuries on her hands, chest and head.
The learned Trial Court, on point of charge, was of the view that no
offence under Section 307 of IPC could be made out as there was no
material which could point towards the intention of the accused
persons including respondent No.2 to attempt to commit murder of the
petitioner.

Source: Indian Kanoon

Leave a Reply