It is currently Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:05 am



Reply to topic  [ 68 posts ] 
FIR against yet another Girl 
Author Message

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:44 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Delhi (India)
Dear Friends,

Here is another example of someone who had the conviction to fight for what is right.

I admire and salute the courage of Mr. Vinod Kaushik, a retired person, whose son and whole family was charged with 498A/506/323/34 IPC.

Though he is based away from Pune, and the marriage was solemnized in Ujjain and the couple stayed most part of their married life in Pune. He left no stone unturned and saw that the other party also feels the equal amount of heat.

Here is the press release what is being given to newspapers.

I have included the email ID of Mr. Kaushik for everyone to contact him. His phone no is withheld to protect his privacy. The same can be taken on request by writing a personal mail to me. But, please don't invade his privacy unless it is required for serious help.

Regards,

Shonee Kapoor




PRESS RELEASE
REVERSE DOWRY CASE - AGAINST THE FATHER, GIRL &
RELATIVES FOR GIVING DOWRY & ABETMENT TO GIVING
DOWRY

How civilized and educated we may pause to be but still we hear
umpteen number of dowry cases getting registered daily. Despite
having a very strong judicial law i.e. “Dowry Prohibition Act”
nothing much has come into action. One of such bizarre dowry case
where an FIR has been registered at PS: Chaturshringhi, Pune
(Maharashtra) against the bride’s father and five other relatives for
giving dowry and abetment to giving dowry, on the complaint of
father of a Noida based Software engineer.

His contention: Giving dowry and abetment to giving dowry is
as much an offence as receiving it.

Demanding or Taking dowry is a crime, so is giving Dowry. In a
first of its kind in the state of Maharashtra, a Noida‐based software
engineer Neeraj was arrested by Chaturshringhi Police for a false
allegation of demanding dowry and had been in custody for eight
days, was later released on bail. His parents obtained anticipatory
bail from Bombay High Court. Neeraj submitted a complaint to the
Chaturshringhi Police Station on 16/04/09 against the wife and her
relatives for giving dowry and abetment to giving dowry but the
Police refused to register the FIR on the plea of jurisdiction, since
the marriage took place at Ujjain.

After receiving a reply through RTI application that his complaint
has been closed and sent to record on the pretext of Jurisdiction,
his father filed a case U/s 156(3) before the Ld. JMFC Court No‐9
Pune, against the daughter‐in‐law Madhvika, her father & four
other relatives, saying that she had mentioned in the FIR that, “her
father gave all kinds of dowry articles in her marriage as per his
capacity” and for the second time in an affidavit before the Ld. Addl.
Session Judge Pune with the sole motive to object the anticipatory
bail of her in‐laws said, “My father gave 15‐16 tolas of Gold in her
marriage to her and a few tola of gold to her husband and in‐laws.
While her father & mother mentioned in their written statements
U/s 161 before the Inquiry officer Mr. B.A. Kamble that they had
given following dowry articles in their daughter’s marriage and all
the dowry articles were sent to Pune by a vehicle after 15 days of
marriage. Not only this, three of the bride’s uncles (Chacha & foofa)
also mentioned in their written statements U/s 161 that they were
present in the marriage with their families and sufficient dowry
was given by their relative in the said marriage. Neeraj separated
from his wife Madhvika within five months of the marriage.
Madhvika filed a false complaint at the Mahila Thana Ujjain, which
was later transferred to Chaturshringhi Police Station, roping in the
entire family U/s 498A/506/323/34 IPC read with Section 3&4 of
Dowry Prohibition Act.

Not to take it lying down, Neeraj’s father filed a complaint against
them. “My daughter‐in‐law says her father had given dowry as per
his capacity, which is illegal. But it’s equally illegal to give dowry. So
I have filed a case against her father and other relatives.” He said.
“We have not taken any dowry, never demanded any dowry, what
ever gifts were given by her parents and relatives, were sent to
Pune after 15 days of marriage but they have filed a false case
roping in the entire family. We are shocked at the steps taken by
our daughter‐in‐law and her family, while the marriage was
solemnised with a Kanyadaan of 11/‐ rupees. I read law books and
filed the case. This is our answer to the daughter‐in‐law and her
relatives, who filed false case against us.” As per the law, giving
dowry is as much a crime as demanding it. Hence, it attracts equal
punishment under Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.
Police records and statements clearly establish that there was no
demand for dowry but they alleged to have given Dowry as per
their capacity. The case has been registered at PS: Chaturshringhi
on the order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No‐9, Shivaji
Nagar Pune. Neeraj said, “The misuse of Dowry Prohibition Act and
Section 498A should be stopped or it can get many innocent people
into trouble.”

WIFE’S CHARGE

Madhvika filed dowry harassment case against Neeraj on July 04,
2008. “I was harassed mentally and physically by my husband
and his parents. They tortured me for dowry. They asked me to take
a loan of Rs. 30 lacs on my salary for buying a house and warned
that if they don’t get money, I would be sent back,” said her
complaint. Madhvika has alleged Neeraj and his parents had
assaulted her for more money. “I was feeling insecure,” she has
said. Neeraj, however, denied all these allegations. “I have already
said all her allegations are baseless. How can my parents assault
her when they are living 2000kms away at Noida and never visited
to Pune during these five months. She did all this because she
siphoned off the entire salaries to her parents on one pretext or the
other and it came to my knowledge. Can a husband tolerate, his
wife spending entire salary on her parents and that too without his
knowledge?

SHORT MARRIAGE

Neeraj and Madhvika married on January 26, 2008 at Ujjain.
Neeraj is a software engineer and was working with TCS, Pune. She
is a SAP Consultant at Cognizant, Pune and was staying with her
husband at Aundh, Pune where Neeraj had taken a flat on rent.
Neeraj’s parents were staying at Noida and never visited Pune
during these four months. “I loved her very much and managed my
transfer to TCS Pune so that we can spend a happy life a month
before marriage but she had never been faithful,” said Neeraj. She
filed a false dowry harassment cases against him and his parents.
“Now she has filed a divorce petition in Ujjain Court asking for the
given dowry returned to her while it is an admitted fact that I left
the flat in a single dress leaving all the articles with her in the same
flat” he said.

Enclosed: Copy of FIR U/s section 3 of DP Act against Manoj Joshi
father of the girl and five others.

(Vinod Kaushik)
Email: kaushik.vnd@gmail.com
Mobile: Withheld (Can be given on request)


Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:53 pm
Profile YIM

Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 419
well done Kaushik
I think this is new inspiration and energy for many forum men as their libido is low. I have been trying to do this DP3 application but been declined by advocate and forum members as it needs to be filed in the first year of marriage. Would it be possible to flollow up once the case is concluded. Can you please send me a PM with his telephone details.
On behalf of the forum I would like to commend on his success and he is a source of joy. I hope you will continue to help the forum members although it can get muddy sometimes due to overwhelming enquires.
Well done and good luck with the next part of your life.
Best regards.


Mon Dec 07, 2009 3:30 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:19 pm
Posts: 631
The dowry articles are all fictitious. It will be interesting to note to see how these dowry articles now that never existed.


Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:07 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 7:47 pm
Posts: 540
A breeze...

This is the answer to the analogy on comparison of Dowry and BRIBE asked few days back by me.

Now the statement of 'aggrieved women can not be invoked by DP3' need to be contested strongly, i.e. a woman alleging the demand is 'aggrieved woman' but the same woman can not be excluded for the past crimes committed by her (i.e. given dowry in the past to get the marriage solemnized). Also 'aggrieved women' "excludes" the MIL and DIL.

The comparison of BRIBE and DOWRY makes it perfect. A bribe given in the past is a crime. It is not a crime if the aggrieved person complaints any new bribe. Here law doesn't protect a woman for giving dowry to get her marriage finalysed too. Any comments?


Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:48 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 419
Hi Bravo
can you explain the full form of MIL and DIL as I am not used to abbrevations. I hope the law protects her towards finalising the marriage. What happens if men do not marry for a year (I mean no marriage takes place in India for 2010) and lets await to see the response from eligible ladies. I hope India may pass a law that it is mandatory for a man to marry and it is optional for women to marry or not.
Regards.


Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:58 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 7:40 pm
Posts: 51
Location: mars
brn wrote:
can you explain the full form of MIL and DIL as I am not used to abbrevations.
Regards.


MIL and DIL - mother in law and daughter in law.


Last edited by highlander23235 on Mon May 03, 2010 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Tue Dec 08, 2009 3:22 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:57 pm
Posts: 370
Excellent work and commendable spirit. But what remains to be seen is what is the effective punitive cost of such travesty in the eyes of law in India.


Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:21 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 419
Dear Highlander
Give a try writeing to RTI and try answer my question. What is the worst thing that can happen from RTI when you request information from RTI?
Regards


Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:27 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
I am trying to register another complaint case against the 498a wife and her two colleagues under IT Act (Cyber Crime) for hacking password and stealing all sorts of informations and deleting important mails from our inbox, forwarding them to her own mail box, taken prints of them and submitted to the IO of the 498a case at Pune, who further submitted all the copies with chargesheet to the court and we were handed over as a prosecution evidence.

This is a crime under section 65, 66 & 72 of IT Act 2005. Stealing of information protected in electronic mode in a computer source protected with a password, hacking of password and breach of confidentiality and privacy with an Imprisonment upto 3 years and fine upto 2 lacs of Rupees. If any one is facing such problem of e.mail hacking can take the help of IT act.


Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:21 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 5:26 pm
Posts: 419
Dear
I think you need file a complaint that your information has been stolen without your permission and you also never divulged your information to anyone. Explore in instructing a reliable advocate on ciber crime. Check the advocates or counsel who have already represented cases related to ciber crime from apex court judgements.
Best regards.


Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:27 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Friend,

I have added all those points in my complaint to Cyber crime cell earlier and in my petition under section 156 (3) now. I am very well advised by my counsel. Not to worry.


Wed Dec 09, 2009 10:41 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:03 am
Posts: 3053
Neeraj ji,
I am glad that you are so aware of your rights and provisions of law Please keep the forum posted so that other member can use your experience to make their lives a little comfortable.


Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:14 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Poppinder Ji

Thanks for the comments. Will definitely do as desired.


Wed Dec 09, 2009 11:26 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:57 pm
Posts: 370
Dear Neeraj, my compliments for such a valiant counterattack inspite of email accounts being hacked. Most girls in India would not have the gumption to do this, and rising out of such an adversity is a a mark of great resiliance on your part. Please do keep posting your valuable insight into cyber crime vis-a-vis misuse of gender biased laws.
good wishes


Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:27 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Hello Everyone,

Here is an update on my DP 3 case in Pune Courts.
DP 3 application filed in PS on 16.04.09
After obtaining no action reply through RTI DP 3 application filed u/s 156(3) on 9/11/09 before the JMFC Pune who ordered investigation and report till 16/01/2010.
FIR registered by police on 14/11/2009 and filed report on 16.01.2010 that written notices sent to all the accused have been sent. Sought more time and time granted till 12/03/2010 and again till 9/4/2010 and again till 5/6/2010 on the same grounds.
Meanwhile, three out of six accused applied for anticipatory bail before Hon'ble Session Judge, Pune on 12/03/2010. Interim bail granted till 12/4/2010. IO filed his report on 12/4/2010 that the accused have been called many time over telephone and through written notices but have not joined investigations, hence bail should not be granted.
On 12/04/2010, I joined with the state being a complainant as Respondent No-2 and filed a written argument, which was allowed by the Link Session Judge and since the Hon'ble Judge was on leave, it was adjourned to 28/04/2010.
During the course of argument, PP explained before the court that they had not joined investigations till 12/4/2010 biut as per todays report of the IO, they have joined investigation recently and hence the Court wanted to know from the IO, the out come of investigation but the IO was not there, so matter was fixed for the next day with directions for the IO to be present. Meantime Counsel for the accused said that no need to call the IO, they can file affidavit in the court that they have joined investigations, which was allowed.

Next day, Affidavit was filed by the three accused persons, saying that this Hon'ble Court granted interim bail to us on 12/3/2010 and we received a telephone call on 14/3/2010 from the IO of the case and accordingly we joined investigations.

Surprisingly this affidavit was false, because as per report of the IO, they did not join investigation till 12/4/2010. They only joined investigation after 12/4/2010. Hence this affidavit is false which tentamounts to action against the persons under section 340 for submitting misleading and false information in the court.
When my Counsel raised this point of action under section 340, the court asked both the Counsels not to implicate the parties in a long drawn legal battle, and I suggest you both to work out on a compromise. and one our was given to explore if any compromise is possible or not.

After an hour, the counsel for the accused himself explained before the court that no compromise is possible bcoze there is ego problem with his client and other date may be fixed. The court itself also tried to convince the accused that her career will be spoiled and she should think of her career.
and next date was fixed for 6/5/2010.

The accused are claiming that they have not given any dowry and this is a false case against them.

It is for the information of all those, who are in line to registered DP-3 or have registered DP-3 and waiting for the punch to be felt on the other end.


Last edited by neerajkaushik on Mon May 10, 2010 3:16 am, edited 2 times in total.



Sat May 01, 2010 8:30 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:14 am
Posts: 267
Guys,

Filling a case for giviing dowry ...would nt apply we are acknowledging that we did receive the Dowry ??
which is fabricated and would lead to the false allegation and exorbiant list been proved correct ?

Any thoughts on this ???


Sat May 01, 2010 9:27 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Hi Andy,

Mostly it is felt the way you have said. But one should look from a very close angle the merits and demerits of his case individually. It cant be applied in all the cases, where dowry is given and practically accepted /demanded by the boy's side.


Sat May 01, 2010 10:13 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:14 am
Posts: 267
Hi Neeraj,

My case is clear....we never demanded any dowry & both being foregin national didnt even stay in india for more than 4 days.....now the mother has given a fake list of 40 lacs and said we had asked for dowry 15 lacs...all the crap u can think of.....now when the case is clear no dowry exchanged or asked than counter case would imply accepting dowry ......how would this suffice ?


Sat May 01, 2010 12:06 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Not at all, if the situation is like this.
U should file DP 3, I am sure they will withdraw their allegation or sit for a compromise.
If they write 40 lacs as dowry, how did they got so much of money ?
Better u write a mail giving details of events, so that I can better suggest you.

best regards


Sat May 01, 2010 12:46 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 6:14 am
Posts: 267
that's true proving the money can be issue......lets ee.have sent u a pvt message hope to hear from you neeraj...


Sat May 01, 2010 1:37 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 7:19 am
Posts: 568
andybrian wrote:
Guys,

Filling a case for giviing dowry ...would nt apply we are acknowledging that we did receive the Dowry ??
which is fabricated and would lead to the false allegation and exorbiant list been proved correct ?
Any thoughts on this ???


I would like to dig on this further...
From what I know.. demanding dowry and giving dowry are equal crimes...
If my wife files a complaint saying that we have demanded dowry... police takes action, a case is registered... WITHOUT a proof if dowry was ACTUALLY demande.
The same should be true for the other side of the coin...
I understand that 'GIVING' dowry does not necessarily mean dowry was "DEMANDED"... but is India ready to embrace this difference?

Neeraj, I would like to request you to kindly detail how you guys went about this.
How difficult is it to lodge a case of "GIVING" dowry? What are the steps? What are the cautions that must be undertaken? Who should I contact... just want into a police station...???
Could you please provide the step by step guide...
If this is too much for you ... could you please PM me your phone number so that I can call you and get a bit of clarity on this one....

Regards,

_________________
Regards,
Tiwana
Skype: aftermarriage


Mon May 03, 2010 9:46 am
Profile

Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 7:19 am
Posts: 568
What is DP 3???


Regards,

_________________
Regards,
Tiwana
Skype: aftermarriage


Mon May 03, 2010 9:50 am
Profile

Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 7:19 am
Posts: 568
shoneek wrote:
Dear Friends,
Enclosed: Copy of FIR U/s section 3 of DP Act against Manoj Joshi
father of the girl and five others.
(Vinod Kaushik)
Email: kaushik.vnd@gmail.com
Mobile: Withheld (Can be given on request)

Hello Shoneek ji,
Could you please provide me with the copy of the FIR lodged in the above matter. Also, could you please provide me with the phone number of Mr. Vinod Kaushik.

I am very very keen to proceed further with this one.

Regards,

_________________
Regards,
Tiwana
Skype: aftermarriage


Mon May 03, 2010 10:01 am
Profile

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:44 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Delhi (India)
I don't have the copy of FIR, The emai address is given in my first post, if the person wishes, he can forward you the copy of the FIR


Mon May 03, 2010 10:20 am
Profile YIM

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
UPDATE on DP 3 at Pune Courts
Hello Every One

Application to initiate proceeding under section: 174, 177,181,191,192,196,193 IPC and Section 340 Cr.PC has been submitted before the Hon'ble Session Judge and Notice has been issued to the accused persons in DP 3 case for filing their reply by 28th May 2010 by the Hon'ble Session Judge.


Thu May 06, 2010 3:48 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 9:00 am
Posts: 607
neerajkaushik

very well going Boss .. All the best

_________________
Regards
Rajeev
"I am thankful to all those who said NO, Its bcoz of them I did it myself" - Einstein


Fri May 07, 2010 7:08 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
rajeevjain wrote:
neerajkaushik

very well going Boss .. All the best


Thanks to the Almighty, who gave me courage to fight it back.


Sat May 08, 2010 7:43 am
Profile

Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 12:58 am
Posts: 28
Hi
I had same story like you . My ex wife is also working for CTS Kolkata . She filed a false 498a and Divorce case to gather . I pray for a stay in divorce till 498 a is resolved court grant it .
then she come to mutual compromise . you have to create presure on her by delaying divorce as much as possible , As a guy you have age advantage over her . so delay the divorce case she will autometically in presure
You asked your lawyear to pray for stay in divorce suit till 498a case is over , as divorce and 498a filed in same ground .. disclosue of written statement in divorce is equivalent to disclousure of defence in 498a case . As par supreme court judgement if civil and criminal case is lodged in same ground then civil case ( here divorce case ) will be stayed untill criminal case is over . i will very soon post the judgement . you can reach me 91-9433014465 any time
0


Sun May 16, 2010 6:36 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
UPDATE on DP-3 Case

Three out of six accused persons got anticipatory bail from Pune Session's court on 16/06/10 completely ignoring application U/s: 340 Cr.P.C. for giving false affidavit that they joined investigation on 14/3/10 but actually it was no so, as per IO"s report they joined investigation only on 17/04/10.


Wed Jun 23, 2010 3:47 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:16 am
Posts: 74
Hi avi_roy1999,

I sent you an e-mail as per our conversation this morning but i might have made some mistake in taking the correct mail id.

Please send me the same to my email id : 498fighter@gmail.com

Thanks for your time and inputs. I appreciate it.


Wed Jun 23, 2010 7:55 am
Profile

Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 1:46 pm
Posts: 5
hi Pragvay

the message is for Avi Roy or for me.
Please clarify.


Sun Jun 27, 2010 1:11 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:08 pm
Posts: 120
Hi Neeraj, Any updates in your case?


Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:39 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Hi all,

After a regular chasing of one year, now the police is all set to arrest the remaining three accused persons in this DP-3 case for giving dowry and abetment to giving of Dowry.


Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:13 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:23 am
Posts: 211
Congrats brother...others will also get encouragement by the act of yours.


Wed Dec 15, 2010 11:41 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:08 pm
Posts: 120
Good going. Thanks for the update!!


Wed Dec 15, 2010 12:03 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 9:05 pm
Posts: 10
Tons of Congratulation for your hard work and success. You donot how much I feel about this news. It looks like a grat victory for Indian mens in 498(a) world. keeep it up.


Sat Dec 18, 2010 6:14 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Friends,

You will appreciate that it is not enough to register FIR against the Dowry givers U/s: DP-3. Time has come when all of us should step out to teach lessons to the dowry givers by attending Court dates and objecting grant of bail to the dowry givers by the Courts.

I suggest 498a.org and SIFF should step up this activity being a NGO to keep an eye on the day today situation of the cases U/s: DP-3 and gather in the courts where there is probability of grant of bail to the dowry givers.

I have discussed with a few legal experts: Representatives of a NGO like ours can be present in Courts to object bail applications where there is admission of giving dowry. I am sure it will help in turning the tables in your favour very soon.

For a modus operandii, interest friends may PM me.


Thu Feb 03, 2011 7:49 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 1:39 am
Posts: 290
just a thought. can this be given in the papers so that people may think twice before lodging false cases.
regards
justcause


Fri Feb 04, 2011 1:05 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
I think Mr Satya and Shonee Kapoor can put light on the issue in a better way.


Fri Feb 04, 2011 3:04 am
Profile

Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 1:44 pm
Posts: 5419
Location: Delhi (India)
The news can be given in papers and yes, it would have a deterrant effect.

Also, NGOs can work for objecting bails/ putting pressure on police to nab the accused and so on.


Fri Feb 04, 2011 5:41 am
Profile YIM

Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 55
somehow the papers only seem to report biased towrds girls .. I never read these stories before my 498, but last one year that's what catches my eyes .. I take TOI - and guess what they always have sketches of harassed women with their stories ... sick!!


Fri Feb 04, 2011 2:42 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Be Patient my dear,

Recognistion of our efforts have started coming in from the media sector also:

ETV Marathi has covered the news on first DP-3 in Maharshtra on 07/04/2011 and the news video has been uploaded on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tv-s7I3_gro

The article has been widely covered as its first page news by LOKMAT (Maharahstra) in all the 11 editions of Lokmat on 16/03/2011 and you can find the link herebelow: http://onlinenews1.lokmat.com/php/detai ... nname=pune


Sat Apr 23, 2011 7:11 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 5:39 pm
Posts: 286
If 498a filed in March 2010, do I have still time to file DP3 under section 156? any time limit to file DP3 with respect to 498a filling date.


Sat Apr 23, 2011 11:04 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Sunny Tommy,

Obviously it can be filed taking a please that you came to know only after registration of this FIR.

All the best.


Sat Apr 23, 2011 11:33 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:15 pm
Posts: 46
dp3 in andhra pradesh, within one year of marriage or within a year of complaint?


Sun Apr 24, 2011 8:17 am
Profile YIM

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
within one year of knowledge even if there is limitation of one year of marriage.


Sun Apr 24, 2011 8:24 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:15 pm
Posts: 46
i enquired, dp3 only within one year of marriage, that too many are saying its amended and no dp3..


Last edited by sivakrishna on Wed Apr 27, 2011 6:30 am, edited 1 time in total.



Tue Apr 26, 2011 3:28 pm
Profile YIM

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Friend,

Please see the amendment made by Central Government in the Dowry prohibition Act in 1984. By which most of the state amendments were overruled.


Wed Apr 27, 2011 3:45 am
Profile

Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:15 pm
Posts: 46
with due regards and respects to all forum members..
dp3 in andhra within one year of marriage, that too if the complaint states that money is given as "pasupu-kumkuma", it comes under a customary or ritual done with regard to class , they belong to. so it cannot be termed as dowry.so no dp3. even in dp3 the act says jewellery given on their own does not come under "dowry", if it is coherence with their status, and if included that its customary to do so.
learnt from my experience. so b4 dp3, check them or else this double edged sword will struck us. demanding dowry is completely different , and if complaint is on demanding dowry and abetting dowry, then dp3 not attracted as it does not amount to acceptance of giving dowry.
but for people who have a reason to believe their dp3 is free of these can proceed.

i dnt want to criticise any member of this forum, but i personally feel few members in this forum are misleading themselves by interpreting a general suggestion given , to their individual cases, without actually understanding the topic fully.

please follow shoneeji's advise, that think twice on your case, and see what is suitable for you depending on your case.


Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:30 am
Profile YIM

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Sivakrishna

Please note the terms you have mentioned about a local custom in a some Andhra community is totally different. But when you are talking as a whole, this are different of what you ahve tried to explain:
If in the FIR, there are submissions that 'my father gave ..... of dowry or my parents gave plenty of dowry articles in my marriage as per their capacity' this kind of submission/acceptance will surely attract DP-3 "for giving dowry of their own without any demand from the boy's side"

If in the FIR, there are allegations that "the boy or his father demanded dowry at the time of marriage or did not allow the marriage to solemnized unless my father paid Rs..... / or gave a car or gold as dowry to the boy and family' then DP-3 shall be attracted.

Harassment for not bringing enough dowry can only be there after marriage but dowry is always given before marriage or at the time of marriage.
Once it is claimed by the girl that her parents gave ....... articles in dowry, she can not claim those articles back legally. Since anything given illegally can not be taken back legally.


Wed Apr 27, 2011 9:50 am
Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:30 am
Posts: 13
siva is right.in andhra dp3 within one year of marriage. that too rare. " custom outweighs law", also called as "Factum Valet", so anything mentioned customary is not supposed to be dowry,(even with respect to dp act ,1961/ 1984).


Wed Apr 27, 2011 3:35 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 2:13 pm
Posts: 15
Dear Siva krishna,

Recently one DP3 FIR was filed against a FIL (who is SI ) and case is solved by zero settlement.
SIFF hyderabad is working on this and they helped me to put DP3 complaint.
I have already submitted DP3 complaint and judge has sent to IO for investigation..I am waiting for the FIR..
Please come in contact with local SIFF for more details..

---------------------------------
Dear Neeraj,

I have put DP3 complaint 2-weeks back, till now IO is not putting FIR...
How can I force IO to file the FIR...

Please reply...
Can we give apllication again in court to follow up DP3 complaint?

====Hari


Wed Apr 27, 2011 3:58 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Friend,

There are two ways:
1. File RTI application to know the status of your complaint to PIO, Office of the SP, of your district
2. File a complaint case U/s: 156(3) in the court.


Wed Apr 27, 2011 5:17 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:30 am
Posts: 13
hari can you give details of the case that was settled with zero amount.


Thu Apr 28, 2011 12:41 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:17 am
Posts: 56
----


Last edited by raj2525ukmail on Sun Jun 09, 2013 9:33 am, edited 2 times in total.



Fri Apr 29, 2011 1:56 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:07 pm
Posts: 53
Hi neeraj
first congrats that you got good success in filling DP3 against your in laws
can you guide me
I filled RCR but wife responded with Crpc125 and in her written statement one allegation goes this way:
at the time of marriage her father gave my father 1.50 lacs,and then there are other typical allegations . now coming to point she tried her best to file 498a in police station but failed right now me and my family members dont have any criminal cases nor we facing domestic violence.just plain RCR that to filled by me.Also 17 feb 2011 my father expired and i had filled rcr in august 2009.
MY question is can i try for dp3 if the maintanece comes heavy to me,
Also would like to thank you for sending me your dp3 complaint to me by mail earlier and was happy to see the positive the effect you have achived.
LET ME KNOW IF I CAN DO SOMETHING HERE CASE IN MUMBAI

THANKS & REGARDS


Sat Apr 30, 2011 1:59 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Friend,

Please send me a comprihensive details of your case alongwith copy of RCR and copy of 125 Petition to my mail.


Sat Apr 30, 2011 2:11 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:07 pm
Posts: 53
NEERAJ thanks for responding i will mail you Crpc125 statement by monday or tuesday.
REGARDS


Sat Apr 30, 2011 2:29 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 7:17 pm
Posts: 26
Bravo Neeraj,
As I delve more in to the forum , I see people like you who want to fight
for the right cause.
You are doing a commendable work by helping people like us and I would appreciate more
if you can send me copy of your FIR as I am working towards filing a complaint against my
LOVELY ANGEL WIFE AND HER RELATIVES under DP-3 act.
I have already shot you an email.
Thanks a bunch.

THIS IS A WAR AND WE MUST WIN


Sat Jan 05, 2013 6:21 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear All,

Latest update in this first case of giving dowry against six members of the girl family in the state of Maharashtra.
Five of the six accused appeared in JMFC Court Pune and obtained regular bail. Sixth accused is expected to appear on the next date for bail.
All the five are coming from Ujjain to Pune for the last four consecutive dates.
Once all the accused make their appearance in Court then charge will be framed.

How do you take it.


Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:03 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Charges framed in this case against all the six accused which include the girl, father, mother, and three uncles on 13/06/2014.
So the actual trial has began against the Dowry Givers.

Order of charge will be uploaded soon.


Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:19 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:32 pm
Posts: 1706
This is a real good effort, I plan to do this if my quash does not yield results and after the b@stard in l@w and M0nster in l@w and F!L give f@lse statement u/s 164. Pl put a template which can be used for the same


Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:50 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2013 10:23 am
Posts: 814
@neerajkaushik

Good job brother

Below is taken from one of your post.
Court gave the lady a chance to settle the issues. But EGO ruined her entire life.

Congrats again brother

neerajkaushik wrote:
Hello Everyone,

Here is an update on my DP 3 case in Pune Courts.
DP 3 application filed in PS on 16.04.09
After obtaining no action reply through RTI DP 3 application filed u/s 156(3) on 9/11/09 before the JMFC Pune who ordered investigation and report till 16/01/2010.
FIR registered by police on 14/11/2009 and filed report on 16.01.2010 that written notices sent to all the accused have been sent. Sought more time and time granted till 12/03/2010 and again till 9/4/2010 and again till 5/6/2010 on the same grounds.
Meanwhile, three out of six accused applied for anticipatory bail before Hon'ble Session Judge, Pune on 12/03/2010. Interim bail granted till 12/4/2010. IO filed his report on 12/4/2010 that the accused have been called many time over telephone and through written notices but have not joined investigations, hence bail should not be granted.
On 12/04/2010, I joined with the state being a complainant as Respondent No-2 and filed a written argument, which was allowed by the Link Session Judge and since the Hon'ble Judge was on leave, it was adjourned to 28/04/2010.
During the course of argument, PP explained before the court that they had not joined investigations till 12/4/2010 biut as per todays report of the IO, they have joined investigation recently and hence the Court wanted to know from the IO, the out come of investigation but the IO was not there, so matter was fixed for the next day with directions for the IO to be present. Meantime Counsel for the accused said that no need to call the IO, they can file affidavit in the court that they have joined investigations, which was allowed.

Next day, Affidavit was filed by the three accused persons, saying that this Hon'ble Court granted interim bail to us on 12/3/2010 and we received a telephone call on 14/3/2010 from the IO of the case and accordingly we joined investigations.

Surprisingly this affidavit was false, because as per report of the IO, they did not join investigation till 12/4/2010. They only joined investigation after 12/4/2010. Hence this affidavit is false which tentamounts to action against the persons under section 340 for submitting misleading and false information in the court.
When my Counsel raised this point of action under section 340, the court asked both the Counsels not to implicate the parties in a long drawn legal battle, and I suggest you both to work out on a compromise. and one our was given to explore if any compromise is possible or not.

After an hour, the counsel for the accused himself explained before the court that no compromise is possible bcoze there is ego problem with his client and other date may be fixed. The court itself also tried to convince the accused that her career will be spoiled and she should think of her career.
and next date was fixed for 6/5/2010.

The accused are claiming that they have not given any dowry and this is a false case against them.

It is for the information of all those, who are in line to registered DP-3 or have registered DP-3 and waiting for the punch to be felt on the other end.

_________________
“In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not.”

http://498afaq.blogspot.in/
http://www.498a.org/contents/general/Ne ... elines.pdf

Good Luck


Tue Jun 24, 2014 11:58 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 3:01 pm
Posts: 78
small question,

My FIL mentioned that he gave me XX lacks as Sreedharan during marriage and he also mentioned that I demanded money (additional dowry after marriage) after marriage and he gave me YY lacks post marriage. But he did not mention dowry in his complaint. Does his claim of giving YY lacks after marriage comes under dowry or sreedharan. Can sreedharan be given after marriage?


Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:18 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 2:32 pm
Posts: 1706
Stridhan can be given anytime by anyone incl your FIL, but it should be from a legal source, on a gift deed to make it Stridhan. There are express provisions for giving gifts and even after giving gift the interest income on gift given by father to daughter is taxable in the income of f@ther as taxable income and not in the hands of the g!rl.


Mon Jul 28, 2014 3:21 am
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 1:28 pm
Posts: 63
sonee sir took 50k from crushing498 for divorce & then the l@wyer who works under him threatened him of dire consequences so that man went to another.
i think the true fighters here should only concentrate on giving free advises instead of money making in the garb.


Mon Jul 28, 2014 1:48 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 9:25 am
Posts: 80
Dear Friends,
This is to bring to your knowledge that another FIR has been registered against the girl and family at Delhi Courts under section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act..
FIR Details:
FIR No. 349 PS Janakpuri, Delhi complainant: Rajender Gupta (FIL)

Accused: Chittaranjan dev Goel, Smt. Shakuntala Goel, Alok Goel and Ashima Goel.

By Order Smt. Sugandha Agarwal, Ld. CMM (West), Tis Hazari, Delhi dated 16/03/2015 in CC No. 62/1/14
You may write to me for copy of order and FIR.

best regards


Sun Mar 29, 2015 11:19 am
Profile

Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:39 am
Posts: 382
Here it is. From: http://www.delhipolice.nic.in/view-fir.html
To help everyone search, just want to add that it's FIR 349 of 2015. And Janak Puri is in West District.



FIRST INFORMATION REPORT
(Under Section ‎154 ‎Cr‎.‎P‎.‎C‎. )‎
( ‎Internet Copy ‎)‎

1. District: WEST DISTT P.S: JANAK PURI YEAR: 2015 FIR NO: 0349 DATE: 19/03/2015

2. Act(s): Section(s):
(1)DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT, 1961 3

3. ‎Occurence of Offence‎:‎
 
(a)  Day: Thursday Date From: Date To:
Time Period: Time From:    hrs Time To:    hrs
(b)  ‎Information received at P‎.‎S‎:   Date: 19/03/2015 Time: 19:40   hrs
(c)  ‎Daily Diary Reference ‎:   Entry No: 47A Time: 19:40   hrs

4. Type of Information‎: WRITTEN
5. Place of Occurrence‎:‎

(a)  Direction and Distance from P‎.‎S‎:‎ 0.00KM Beat No:
(b)  Address: UNKNOWN,UNKNOWN
(c)  ‎In case‎, ‎Outside the limit of the Police Station‎:‎

Name of P‎.‎S‎:‎ District:


6. Complainant ‎/ ‎Informant ‎: ‎
 

(a)  Name: RAJENDER GUPTA (S/O) JAGANNATH GUPTA
(b)  Date‎/‎Year of Birth: 0 Nationality: INDIAN
(c)  Passport No: Date of Issue: Place of Issue:
(d)  Occupation:
(e)  Address: 54B, PKT- D1/C JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI-110058

7. ‎Details of Known ‎/ ‎Suspected ‎/ ‎Unknown accused with full particulars‎(‎attach separate sheet if necessary‎).:‎

8. Reason for delay in reporting by the complainant informant:
9. Particulars of properties stolen‎/ ‎involved‎(‎attach separate sheet if necessary‎):‎
 
Sl. Property Type(Description) Est Value(Rs.) Status

10. Total value of property stolen‎:
11. Inquest Report ‎/ ‎U‎.‎D‎. ‎Case No‎.‎, ‎if any‎:‎
12. F‎.‎I‎.‎R Contents‎(‎attach separate sheet‎,‎if required‎):‎
  IN THE COURT OF HON'BLE A.C.M.M., TIS HAZARI Complaint Case No. /2011 In the matter of: Rajender Gupta S/o Late Shri Jagannath Gupta R/o: 54B, Pkt: D1/C Janak Puri, New Delhi-110058 ....... Complainant Versus Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel & others ...... Respondent P S: Janakpuri. COMPLAINT U/S 156(3) & 200 CR.P.C. FOR REGISTERING A CASE FOR GIVING DOWRY AND ABETMENT TO THE GIVING OF DOWRY OF THEIR OWN, WITHOUT ANY DEMAND, U/S: 3 OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT 1961 AGAINST THE RESPONDENT. HON'BLE SIR/MADAM, MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:- 1. That a marriage took place on 22/01/2014 at Shubh Nimantran Banquet Hall at Janakpuri, New Delhi between Ashima Goel D/o Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel and Vipul Gupta S/o: Shri Rajender Gupta. 2. That though it was an arranged marriage processed through a matrimonial website www.shadi.com between the two well educated adults, earning handsome amounts and fully grownup soulmates Ashima Goel & Vipul Gupta, there was no question of demanding any dowry at all which is evident from the bare persual of the false Complaint/FIR also, as there is no such allegations of demand of any Dowry before or at the time of marriage by the complainant or any of his family members. 3. That though there was no demand of any dowry by the complainant or any of his family members, even then in a complainant (Annexure:1) dated 16/06/2014 made at Women Cell, Karnal by Mr. Chittaranjan Dev Goel, it is alleged that Mr. Chittaranjan Dev Goel had given enough dowry in his daughter Ashima's marriage by spending about Rs. Forty Five (45) Lakhs. 4. That Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel, had categorically mentioned in the 1st Para of his complaint that "shadi par lag-bhag 45 lakh rupaye kharch kiye the, tatha kafee dan dahej diya tha" 5. Similarly Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel has again stated in the same complaint at 5th Para that, "he had also given Rs. Seven lakhs for a car in his daughter Ashima's marriage." 6. That again in a false complaint / FIR No: 962/2014 dated 31/08/2014 (Annexure: 2) frivolously got registered at PS: Janakpuri, New Delhi U/s: 323, 328, 342, 376, 498A, 406, 506, 34 IPC by Ms. Ashima Goel, against the complainant & his entire family, she had claimed that enough dowry was given by her parents in her marriage solemnized at Delhi on 22/01/2014 by spending about Rs. Forty Five (45) lakhs. 7. That before this complaint at Women Cell, Karnal and FIR No: 962/2014 at PS: Janakpuri, I and my family members were thinking that the items given in Ashima's marriage by her parents & relatives are her Stridhan or gifts given by relatives or are the household items purchased by Ashima out of her own salaries for her matrimonial house. 8. That only after this complaint at Women cell, Karnal as well as FIR No: 962/2014, PS: Janakpuri, I and my family members came to know that Mr Chittaranjan Dev Goel had given enough dowry in his daughter Ashima's marriage, though it was never demanded by the complainant or any of his family members. 9. That whatever Stridhan or Dowry Articles, her father and relations gave to their daughter Ashima and also the Stridhan given to Ashima by my family, were taken/ received by Ashima and her parents on 02/07/2014 and kept in a locker opened exculsively in her name at HDFC Bank, Janakpuri Branch, New Delhi and has been reduced in writing as a Declaration (Anenxure:3). 10. Not only this the photographs, taken at the time of receiving of Stridhan are also attached as Annexure: 4). 11. That as per Section 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, as defined herein, "Giving dowry and abetment to the giving of dowry is a criminal offence". Moreover neither the applicant nor any of his family members ever demanded any dowry in this marriage but Sh. Chittaranjan Dev Goel and Mrs. Shakuntala Goel gave dowry of their own in their daughter Ashima's marriage and Ashima and her brother Alok Goel never stopped their parents Smt. & Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel, from giving dowry as such abetted to the giving of dowry in the marriage. 12. That the Dowry Prohibition Act prescribes stringent punishment of five years imprisonment and fine equivalent to the amount of dowry to a person, who gives or takes or abets to the giving or taking of Dowry under section 3 of the DP Act 1961 to curb this social evil. 13. That Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel and his daughter had admitted this fact of giving Dowry in the marriage in complaints before the Women Cell, Karnal and in FIR No: 962/2014 PS: Janakpuri roping in the entire family of the complainant with vested interest, hence are liable for punishment under section 3 of the dowry prohibition act. 14. That the police should also refer the investigations in regard to the known sources of Income of Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel to the Income Tax Deptt. to verify if Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel can afford to spend approximately Rs. 45 Lacs in his daughter Ashima's marriage as claimed by Ms. Ashima in her statement before the Investigating Officer as well as by Mr Chittaranjan Dev Goel in his complaint at Women Cell, Karnal, as is held in the case of Neera Singh Vs State and Another by Hon'ble Delhi High Courts, "that the police should also investigate into the known sources of income of the complainant and her family members who claims to have given exaggerated quantum of Jewellery and claims to have spent huge amounts in marriage, while dealing with Dowry Harassment case." It is one such case where the girl's father being a simple Clerk with an advocate, claims to have spent about Rs. 45 Lakhs in his daughter's marriage and other ceremonies as mentioned in the FIR which need special attention of the Law Enforcing Agencies to bring the truth on record. 15. That the persons who admitted of giving dowry without any demand are liable to be prosecuted under the Law of the Land and the persons who did not object to the giving of Dowry by the parents of Ashima are liable to be prosecuted for abetment to the giving of Dowry as well. Accordingly a case may be registered against all these persons taking cognizance for the giving of dowry and for abetment to the giving of dowry. 16. That the marriage was solemnized at New Delhi, where the false case / FIR against the applicant and his entire family at PS: Janakpuri, Delhi has been registered, where the Dowry is alleged to have been given. Hence the cause of action arose under the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. 17. Hence Smt. & Shri Chittaranjan Dev Goel and Ms. Ashima and her brother Alok Goel are liable for giving dowry and abetment to the giving of dowry and accordingly cognizance may be taken by registering a case against all the accused persons as is held by Hon'ble Justice S.N. Dhingra of the Delhi High Court in famous case Titled as Mrs. Neera Singh vs state & others in Criminal M.C.: 7262/2006; "That the Police should simultaneously register a case against the parents of the Complainant as well, U/S: 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, who marry their well educated daughters by giving dowry without any demand. HENCE THIS APPLICATION. PRAYER: IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AS MENTIONED ABOVE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, IT IS MOST HUMBLY PRAYED THAT COGNIZANCE MAY BE TAKEN AGAINST ALL THE ACCUSED PERSONS FOR GIVING DOWRY OF THEIR OWN, WITHOUT ANY DEMAND AND ALSO FOR ABETMENT TO THE GIVING OF DOWRY U/S: 3 OF THE DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT. PRAYED ACCORDINGLY SD ENGLISH Rajender Gupta Applicant Place: Delhi Dated: 27/09/2014 Through Counsel A K Padhy PADHY & CO. (Solicitors) Office: I-37, Sector-41. NOIDA. Mobile: +9199299978, +919654819454, +919911512400 E. Mail: padhynco@gmail.com. DO/PS Janakpuri to register a case u/s 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act and investigation be handed over to SI Umesh Yadav. SD ENGLISH R S Meena SHO/J. Puri 19.3.15. पुलिस कार्यवाही अज थाना तहरीर की दरपेशगी पर मुकदमा हजा बाजुर्म मजकुर u/s 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act दर्ज रजिस्टर करके असल तहरीर Computer आपरेटर Ct Suresh No. 1264/Wको देकर अपनी निगरानी में दर्ज कम्पयुटर कराया गया। जो FIR को मन DO द्वारा चैक किया गया जिसको दुरूस्त पाये जाने पर फ्रीज करवाया गया। Computerized FIR मय असल तहरीर हवाले SI Umesh Yadav के की गई जो बाहुक्म जनाब SHO साहब मुकदमा हजा कि आईन्दा तफ्तीश अमल में लायेगें। दीगर नकुलात बजरिये डाक अफसरान बाला की खिदमत में अरसाल होगी। HC/DO
13. ‎Action Taken ‎(‎Since the above information reveals commission of offence‎(‎s‎) ‎u‎/‎s as mentioned at item no‎.‎2 ‎:‎
 
(i) Registered the case and took up the investigation   OR
(ii) Directed ‎(‎Name of the I‎.‎O‎):‎ Rank:
PIS Number: to take up the investigation ,OR
(iii)Refuse investigation due to:‎   OR
(iv)Transferred to P‎.‎S‎(‎name‎): District:
     on point of jurisdiction‎.‎   
  F‎.‎I‎.‎R‎. ‎read over to the complainant ‎/ ‎informant‎, ‎admitted to be correctly recorded and a copy given to the‎ complainant ‎/ ‎informant‎, ‎free of cost ‎:‎
  R.O.A.C:

14.  
 
Signature ‎/ ‎Thumb Impression of ‎ The Complainant ‎/ ‎Informant ‎:                                     Signature of Officer‎                                       
    NAME
    RANK‎
    PIS NUMBER‎

15. ‎Date and Time of despatch to the court‎:‎


Sun Mar 29, 2015 3:33 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 68 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.