penel code


Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty: Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine
For the purpose of this section, “cruelty” means:
(a) Any willful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman; or 
(b) Harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand.

(a) Cruelty by vexatious litigation
(b) Cruelty by deprivation and wasteful habits
(c) Cruelty by persistent demand
(d) Cruelty by extra-marital relations
(e) Harassment for non-dowry demand
(f) Cruelty by non-acceptance of baby girl
(g) Cruelty by false attacks on chastity
(h) Taking away children

Those accused under Section 498A are not serial abusers of law or criminals or terrorists, but still, they are treated as hardcore criminals. Most of the cases under Section 498A arise out of misunderstanding or ego clashes at home, and are filed to settle personal scores. The entire family of the husband is made accused in the case to 'teach them a lesson'.

SECTION 498A OF IPC MISUSED How are you at risk and why it is dangerous for the society? Your wife/daughter-in-law who's demands are not met can make a written false complaint of dowry harassment to a nearby police station. The husband, his old parents and relatives are immediately arrested without sufficient investigation and put behind bars on a non-bailable terms. Even if the complaint is false, you shall be presumed guilty until you prove that you are innocent.

penel code

Section 91(1) CRPC: An analysis of Constitutional validity

The whole technique determined in the Code of criminal methodology, 1973 depends on standard of equity and reasonableness. One of the major standards of lawful statute is that a man blamed for any offense ought to be given equivalent opportunity to be heard and to safeguard himself. It is in consonance with this hypothesis just that there are arrangements in Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) identified with issue of process, arrangements in segment 161 (3), arrangement in segment 162 of the code that any announcement recorded over the span of examination, should not be marked by the individual putting forth the expression, has been indicated.
Essentially maintaining the comparative suggestion, the security against self implication has been given as a unique major ideal, under Part III of the Constitution of India. Article 20(3) states that: "No individual blamed for any offense should be constrained to be an observer against himself."
This paper manages the energy of pursuit and seizure of the court and police specialists especially the ability to issue summons or notice by the court or officer accountable for the police headquarters under area 91(1) of CrPc. The issue has been managed in detail by the peak court of this nation in the event of M.P Sharma and others versus Satish Chandra, State of Bombay versus Kathi Kalu Oghad and State of Gujrat v Shyamlal Mohanlal Choksi. In the wake of experiencing all the three case laws it is felt that the issue has been wrongly taken up by the court. The Supreme Court in Kalu Oghad's case has barely deciphered the articulation "to be a witness" which has made circumstance where an exceptionally limit space is accessible for the real assurance of this privilege in regard of generation of records.

This has been finished by managing the general arrangements of pursuit and seizure and than breaking down the Shyamlal Choksi and also Kalu Oghad's case. General Provision with respect to pursuit and seizure Segment 91 with the head note Process to Compel Production of Things of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 states that:
(1) Whenever any Court or any officer responsible for a police headquarters consider that the generation of any record or other thing is essential or attractive with the end goal of any examination, request, trial or other continuing under this code by or under the watchful eye of such court or officer, such court may issue a summons, or such officer a composed request, to the individual in whose ownership or power such archive or thing is accepted to be, expecting hm to go to and create it, or to deliver it, at the time and place expressed in the summons or request.

(2) Any individual required under this segment simply to deliver an archive or other thing might be esteemed to have conformed to the order in the event that he makes such report or thing be created as opposed to going to by and by to deliver the same.

Our National & International Network

We have network of specialized and skilled detectives & private investigators in the fellowing cities, states and Countries also except India respectively.

Countries : India, Nepal, SriLanka, Hongkong, Taiwan, Australia, New Zealand, Middle East, United Kingdom (U.K), Germany, Italy, United States of America (USA), Canada.

States : Delhi, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Uttaranchal, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Bihar, west Bengal, Maharashtra

Major Cities : new delhi, chandigarh, jalandhar, amritsar, ludhiana, dehradun, haridwar, roorkee, agra, aligarh, kanpur, jhasi, lucknow, varanasi, ambala, kalka, yamuna nagar, gurgaon, udaipur, jaipur, jaisalmer, surat, ahemdabad, gandhi nagar, patna, kolkata, mumbai, pune, nasik,