Tuesday, September 7, 2010

U-turn by victim's parents; husband let off in dowry death in New Delhi

This again reinforces the misuse of 304B to fudge data of dowry death and dowry harassment to mislead the legislatures and siphon funds from US handlers in the name of women emancipation and empowerment
A recent judgment by Delhi HC has exposed and the mentality of girls’ parents to implicate husband and all his relatives in the desparate attempt to seek revenge or encash the opportunity to extort monies
the complete judgment is available here

U-turn by victim's parents; husband let off in dowry death in New Delhi

Monday, Sep 6, 2010,
A Delhi court has acquitted six members of a family, including the husband of the victim, in a dowry death case, considering the flip-flops of her parents while recording the testimonies during the trial.
"I am astonished to see their (parents of the victim) changed versions. These witnesses have deposed entirely different things in their cross examination by their examination in chief," additional sessions judge SC Rajan of a fast track court said.
The court absolved Sandeep Chopra, the husband of deceased Shefali, and his five family members of the charges under section 304B (dowry death), 498A (subjecting a woman to cruelty) and 406 (criminal breach of trust) of the IPC.
Shefali, who married Sandeep in 2006, was found hanging with the ceiling at her matrimonial house at Chitranjan Park area in New Delhi on February 9, 2007.
In the FIR, Anita Bhatia, mother of the victim, had alleged that Shefali's husband used to harass her as one of his friends was not invited to their wedding. They had also demanded dowry, she had alleged.
She also charged the accused first killed her and then hanged her to the ceiling to establish that she committed suicide.
During the trial, Anita and Kuldeep Bhatia, parents of the victim, first testified that she was subjected to cruelty by the accused.
However, when cross-examined by defence lawyers, they took a complete U-turden and denied their own allegations.
The court, while perusing their testimonies, was of the opinion that there was some substance in the allegations but later found out that they were refuted by the witnesses themselves.

Full text @

No comments:

Post a Comment