Kartik Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.

Decided On : May-18-2007

Court : Jharkhand

LAW: Section 227, Section 313, the Indian Penal Code, the Dowry Prohibition Act, Section 227, Section 498A, the Dowry Prohibition Act, Section 498A I.P.C., Section 313 I.P.C., the Dowry Prohibition Act, Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 228, Section 227 Cr, Section 228

PERSON: D.G.R. Patnaik, Ghatshila, Kartik Kumar, telephonic calls, Darjeeling, P.C., telephonic, P.C.

NORP: J.1, Hindu

DATE: 30th June, 2004, 2003, 28.06.1998, A month later, about two years, two months, the month of February, 2000, the month of May, 2000, November, 2000, the month of December, 2000

ORG: Additional Sessions, dismissed.2, Counsel for the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, District Purnea (Bihar, Purnea (Bihar, the Opposite Party, Pune, Purnea (Bihar, Learned Counsel, the Opposite Party, Learned Counsel, Learned Counsel, the Opposite Party, the Opposite party No, Learned Counsel, the Opposite Party

CARDINAL: 260, 414, 2, 2, 1, 2, 1, 2, 4.7.1999, 09.12.2000, 313, 2, 1, more than one and half years, 2, 2, 2

EVENT: Ghatshila, Ghatshila, Ghatshila, Ghatshila

GPE: F.I.R., Ranchi, Cr, F.I.R., F.I.R., Purnea, Purnea, F.I.R., P.C.

FAC: the Ghatshila Police Station, Worth Rs, petitioners.10

LOC: East Singhbhum

PRODUCT: Tata Sumo, Vidaai, Tata Sumo, Tata Sumo, Section 498A, Section 498A, Tata Sumo