<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (1) TMI 640 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127956</link>
    <description>Section 498-A and the allied dowry-death provision were construed purposively to advance protection against cruelty and dowry harassment, so the term &quot;husband&quot; was held to include a person who entered into a marital relationship and assumed that role, even if the marriage was alleged to be invalid or void; liability could not be avoided by relying on technical invalidity. The High Court&#039;s summary refusal of leave to appeal against acquittal was also held unsustainable because it had not recorded adequate reasons in a matter involving legal questions and appraisal of evidence, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 12:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=164828" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (1) TMI 640 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127956</link>
      <description>Section 498-A and the allied dowry-death provision were construed purposively to advance protection against cruelty and dowry harassment, so the term &quot;husband&quot; was held to include a person who entered into a marital relationship and assumed that role, even if the marriage was alleged to be invalid or void; liability could not be avoided by relying on technical invalidity. The High Court&#039;s summary refusal of leave to appeal against acquittal was also held unsustainable because it had not recorded adequate reasons in a matter involving legal questions and appraisal of evidence, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>