demand of dowry

Maqsood Main And Anr. vs Rukhsana Tazeem And Anr ( 20/07/1998)

advtanmoy 08/08/2022

MUSLIM STRIDHAN- Offence under Section 6 OF DP Act is punishable with two years’ imprisonment only and in the normal course Section 468 would apply, but we may look to Sections 472 and 473 as well. Section 472 speaks of a continuing offence for which a fresh period of limitation shall begin at every moment of time during which the offence continues and Section 473 empowers a Court: to extend the period of limitation to take cognizance beyond such time.

Dowry Prohibition Act- 1961

advtanmoy 15/12/2021

If any person, after the commencement of this Act, gives or takes or abets the giving or taking of dowry, he shall be punishable [with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, and with fine which shall not be less than fifteen thousand rupees or the amount of the value of such dowry, whichever is more

What is dowry and whether demand of articles made and met after marriage constitute dowry

advtanmoy 04/10/2018

It is apparent from the definition that it is necessary that property or valuable security so as to constitute dowry must be given “as consideration for the marriage” The word “consideration” is not defined in the Act. The meaning of the word “consideration” as per Chambers’ 20th Century Dictionary 1969, Revised Edition reprinted in 1969 is : “motive or reason; […]

Ashok Kumar Vs State of Haryana[ALL SC 2010 JULY]

advtanmoy 02/04/2018

KEYWORDS:-the cruelty, harassment and demand of dowry should not be so ancient whereafter, the couple and the family members have lived happily. DATE:-08-07-2010 AIR 2010 SC 2839 : (2010) CriLJ SC 4402 : JT 2010 (7) SC 460 : (2010) 12 SCC 350 : (2010) 7 SCALE 30 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Ashok Kumar Appellant Versus State of Haryana Respondent […]

  • A judge is the pillar of entire justice system and public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from a judge (SC-10/12/2019) - A person discharging judicial duties acts on behalf of the State in discharge of its sovereign functions. Dispensation of justice is not only an onerous duty but has been considered as akin to discharge of a pious duty, and therefore, is a very serious matter. The standards of probity, conduct, integrity that may be relevant for discharge of duties by a careerist in another job cannot be the same for a judicial officer. A judge holds the office of a public trust. Impeccable integrity, unimpeachable independence with moral values embodied to the core are absolute imperatives which brooks no compromise. A judge is the pillar of the entire justice system and the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function. Judges must strive for the highest standards of integrity in both their professional and personal lives.
  • A daughter has no right u/s 14 of Hindu Succession Act of her father’s property if it is occupied by her brother through adverse possession (SC-28/08/2023) - A Hindu daughter has no right u/s 14 of Hindu Succession Act on the property of her father if it is occupied by her brother through adverse possession (SC-28/08/2023)- [See Pritam Singh v. State, AIR (1950) SC 169: (1950) SCR 453, Hem Raj v. State of Ajmer AIR (1954) SC 462: (1954) SCR 1133, Bengal Chemical & Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Employees, AIR (1959) SC 633: 1959 Supp (2) SCR 136: (1959) 1 LLJ 413, Municipal Board, Pratabgarh and Anr. v. Mahendra Singh Chawla and Ors. (1982) 3 SCC 331: (1983) SCC (L&S) 19, Taherakhatoon (dead) by LRs v. Salambin Mohammad (1999) 2 SCC 635]

Jurisprudence

Recent Updates