Saroj Bala v. State Of Haryana And ORS
!
"# $!%&'&"() * + ,-./
0"1 - 22233!-- ( 4!0','
!
"# 0. ( ($ " +!0'
222!'3"($!( '
) 5 6
2
"
### / 2 6
& ' ()*! +
,)
+
-
.
,)
(
+
%+
!( 0! 10(,
3%+ -4 2 + (0) 0( 0& 10(0 + !01 !05
!0) 46
%
0( 0& 10(0 +
2 .
+
%
%
2% "9(0
+ 2
%
9
6 : 2 . . .
2. :
9 . . ; 0( 0& 10(0 %
+ .
%
% % + % 9 .
% %
+
.
'
8% -% 2 . <
2%+ % 6
=%
+ % 2
4
!0*
!0) 46 . !, 46 +
+ 4 + %
% +
,)"9 46
-
(5!
6 6
+ % 2 !0* ,)"9 46 . !, 46
. '
%
-
(! (1 10(0 .
% 2 !05
!01 46
+ , % <
1* . !(!
6 6 .
. . <
%
2 .
/%
%+ 0& (0 10(* & ' %
%+
%+
+%
. % %
>91 7% . 2
% % . .
-% >9(09 ? 7 % ; !0 0* 10(& < . % )09)&@ 2% %
'
AB< 1(C + %
>9((9 6 3% + 9 %9 '
%
2
%+ 2 +%
+%
2
+ +
.
% 2 <
!(!
6 6 2.
+ + % 2 ,)"9 !1!
!0* 46 2
% 2
% + +%
* ' % %2
.9
%+
2
+ %
% + .
2
9 9 .
%
.
7
%
%
% . +
% .
% %
.
. + %
9 . %
%
+ .
. % + %
'
8%A>*C
% AC %
2
>&9 %
%2
% +
. %
>*9'
+ .
.
>(! 2%
"
-% 9 >,9 + % %
+ /%
%
>(&9 ? >(59 4
>1(9 4 '
< 4 + + ; . %
2
2%
% % +
)
4
+% !0* 46 2 +
%
2
2 2
2 + $ %+ 2
+
% 4 %%
2
+ 2 2%+
% 2
<% 2.
AC
<
+ %2 2 2%+
. 2 +
% .
+ /%
+%
2%
(0
. 3%+ 2
E2 %
%+ 3% 8
.
!!
"
##
$% !!
& #'( )*% !!
'+, "-- ./ - .- 01. - 1 -
1-1
- - / 2 1-1/0 , 3 -/ 0 - , .- - / 0-.0 1452 - 1. ,/---/. - '/ 11
0-1 -11 6 -1 -1 - /-
+1 - --- /0 - - 7!$8-9 - / 8 : - . - ---1- /---- --
. 3%+ 2
:2 %
!" #
# %+ 3% 2
;
. + 2 ;
< : .
1- --- / 1 -
--- < - 1--- 1 /0---- - . / - 1/ =0 1-
8 21 - - -- / -
1- -- -/0--10/ .-/0 - - /-/01/ 11-/0 1/0/ --
1- - ..2/ --
10.-/0
=0-- >0 1
1-
1 - ?
(( A two Judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Girdhar Shankar Tawde vs. State of Maharashtra (2002) 5 SCC 177, speaking through Justice Umesh C. Banerjee, opined as follows: "18... In any event the wilful act or conduct ought to be the proximate cause in order to bring home the charge under section 498-A and not de hors the same. To have an event sometime back cannot be termed to be a factum taken note of in the matter of a charge under section 498-A. The legislative intent is clear enough to indicate in particular reference to Explanation (b) that there shall have to be a series of acts in order to be a harassment within the meaning of Explanation (b). The letters by themselves though may depict a reprehensible conduct, would not, however, bring home the charge of section 498-A against the accused. Acquittal of a charge under section 306, as noticed hereinbefore, though not by itself a ground for acquittal under section 498-A, but some cogent evidence is required to bring home the charge of section 498-A as well, without which the charge cannot be said to be maintained..."
(1 . %
9 %2 . . .
2
% . .
% .
%
%
+ .
+% A
$% &
'"(
) ** +#
,
-./0 '
)
$( .
/
11
**
'"(
#
#
2
%+
$ & "
2 +/ --- !$ !) ! 7 % % +
(!
4 .
% %
%
+
+
(, + %
AC
*2 2
'50. 6 21@ - A@ 6 # / A@