Vikas Kumar@Vikas v. State Of Haryana

 
 
 

  


  

  ! " !#$!%!


& '( 


 
 

       

 

 


 !

"""

  

#   

 %&'



 $ !$  # $ 
 ()* + ,,-'

 &- - .,-%



 &/0.

%,0 1,0 )

-20,


$





 

 *3 4#

 !6 ()*  ! 6 6

$  $$3 778



 



: )

 ; * $  <  

$

) 6  36 )

  $ ) # .,., )  $ 6!$ 6! '10,-010,-

 6!$ 6! '10,-010,- !$  *   * 

 *3 #  ) $ 

$ 6

 6

3 6# 6 (  6 )  $

  $$   6 6

$



  9 ) 3



  

6 =$ $  6 = 6  6# 6

$$

$ > 3 $ 

 $

6 =$ $ 6 

$  $

6 =$ $ 6 #  $? -% . .,.&  )  $6# * -0 ,, ,,,;@   6 6# )   6 6# =@ ! 6 6 6 # .,.- .,.&

6# 8  $

 !# 



$  3# 6# $ 

  6# $   =  6#  ) !

6

!$ >



3

 !#

*3 ($ )   6

$ 6 $$ 3

  $? 

 6# 6 )   6# 6#

$$#  $# 6 $ 6 )

 6 !  # 

6 )  6 # $

!   6# 6 !  6! 4*.0BC0/10

 !#

  ) 

$# 6# 6#



$$ 6 6# 

 #   #   ! ) 3$$  # # 6#  : 6 #  $$  

6 DD  $  6$ 3 $ $   # 6$ 6 6 !# 6$ ()* 

 # .,.,   $ 

 $? -% . .,.& )   $ $ $    66  6$ ) $  $ 

 ! $ 6 6 

3  6$ $# 6    $  ) 

$  6 4D!$

6







  

    





 @2  



778. From the contents of the complaint, on the basis of which FIR was got registered and the statement got recorded by the complainant, it is evident that there was no promise to marry initially when the relations between the parties started in the year 2017. In any case, even on the dates when the complainant alleges that the parties had physical relations, she was already married. She falsely claimed that divorce from her earlier marriage took place on 10.12.2018. However, the fact remains that decree of divorce was passed only on 13.01.2021. It is not a case where the complainant was of an immature age who could not foresee her welfare and take right decision. She was a grown up lady about ten years elder to the appellant.

She was matured and intelligent enough to understand the consequences of the moral and immoral acts for which she consented during subsistence of her earlier marriage. In fact, it was a case of betraying her husband. It is the admitted case of the prosecutrix that even after the appellant shifted to Maharashtra for his job, he used to come and stay with the family and they were living as husband and wife. It was also the stand taken by the appellant that he had advanced loan of ₹1,00,000/- to the prosecutrix through banking channel which was not returned back.''
  6 4D!

6



 



  

   !

"

      

  # $  %

 &'

(&)* +,  

 &

-  



  .  

   



  

# $%

&'(&)*

,/ 0 1





2



    

# %

&'()*3*+ +4,

  0 



.



 



  

# $%

&'()*+

+ ,

" 6



"

0# $%

&'() 

    -    "  7 6  

  .  

   



# $%

&'(&)3+8



#   -- / .,.% 

# $ &

 6 ..

#

  6  $$   -% 1 .,.%   3 6 - / .,.%E = 

 ! $

.1 / .,.%   3$$ 66   -/  3



! =6

A  66  6 

3

 3 $#  6 

$   #  !# E ! $ #  $      E  

 #   $ $ 3$$  !$  

 # 6#  !  $#

 6 # =  6 

 @ <6 ! $ $ !$ ! 

 : !$ !;# !  $

;

# 



  $$3



 

 !" #  %