Satish Kumar Batra and ors. Vs. State of Haryana

Decided On : Apr-01-2009

Court : Supreme Court of India

LAW: Section 498A, the Indian Penal Code, Section 406 IPC, Section 498A IPC, Section 498A IPC, Chapter XX, Section 113B, the Indian Evidence Act, the Evidence Act', the Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act, the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, Section 113B of the Evidence Act, Section 113B of the Evidence Act, Section 498A, Section 113B, Section 498A., Section 498A IPC, the Criminal Law (Second Amendment, the Dowry Prohibition Act, the Evidence Act, Section 306 and Section 498A, Article 14 of the Constitution.16

NORP: J.1, Punjab, Satish, cruelty.--Whoever, demand.10, Satish

ORG: Haryana High Court, the Criminal Revision Petition, the Revision Petition, Additional Sessions, IPC, Additional Sessions, Santosh, Santosh Kumari, Delhi Police Station, FIR, Santosh Kumari Ex, Court under Sections 406, Court, Santosh Kumar, the High Court, Criminal Revision Petition (Criminal Revision No, the High Court, The High Court, the High Court, the High Court, the High Court, the High Court, the High Court, the High Court, Section 498A IPC, follows:498-A. Husband, Section 304B, Section 498A IPC, Cruelty, Sections 304B, the Statement of Objects, the Joint Committee of the Houses, IPC, CrPC, Section 306 IPC, Court, Mafatlal Industries Ltd., Union of India, Collector of Customs, Court, State, Commr, H.R.E., Butyle Tube Industries, U.P. Financial Corporation, 2002]SUPP5SCR666, T.N., Court, the High Court

GPE: Sonepat, Sonepat, Police, Sonepat, Satya, R.I., R.I., India, the United States of America, Bench, Rajasthan v. Union, Padma

DATE: 1860, 21.10.1985, 01.12.1991, two years, one month, PW 1, PW 5, PW 6, 1872, 1983, 1986, seven years, a period of, seven years, three years, 45 of 1860).11, 46 of 1983, 1961, 1973, 1962, two years, more than 13 months

PERSON: Judicial Magistrate, Santosh Kumari, Satish Kumar, Sunil Kumar, Ram Lal, Ishwar Devi, Ram Lal, Kumar, 498A IPC, Ram Lal, Counsel, PWs 1, Ishwar Devi, PWs 1, Nos, Nos, marriage.9, Reasons, Budhan Choudhry v. State of, Nathella Sampathu, Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar, Sri Shirur Mutt, Hussein Haji Abraham Umarji, Sundara Rao v. State, PWs 1, Nos, Sunil Kumar, Satya Devi

CARDINAL: Six, 1, 695, 20,000/-, 5,000/-, 10,000/-, 20,000/-, 25,000/-, 21.05.1992, 498A, 498A, 500/-, five, one, 607 of 2000, two, two, 1, more than 13, 3, 1, 498A, two, One, two, 1956]29ITR349(SC, 15, 1955CriLJ374, 1997(89)ELT247(SC, nine, 3, 786, 825)The, 1978]1SCR1, 1954]1SCR1005, 2004CriLJ3860, 2002]255ITR147(SC, 5, 6, 9.7.2001, 9.7.2001

WORK_OF_ART: Satish Kumar, Satish Kumar, Satish Kumar

LOC: Stridhan

PRODUCT: Section 120B IPC, Section 498A, Section 498A IPC

ORDINAL: First, first

TIME: 1 i.e.