Suspense Crime Sach Ka Dam
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court made a major comment while dismissing the dowry charges against a man. The court said that if a man does not demand sexual pleasure from his wife, then where will he go? Justice Anish Kumar Gupta dismissed the case against Pranjal Shukla and two others saying that the evidence presented in the FIR and the statements of witnesses do not support the claims of dowry harassment.
The court said the dispute was about sexual relations between husband and wife.
While hearing the petition, the High Court found that the primary allegations center around disagreements between the husband and wife regarding sexual relations, and these disputes are not related to the demand for dowry. The court said in its order that it is clear that the dispute between the two parties is about the lack of sexual relations, due to which an FIR was lodged by the woman and false and fabricated allegations were made regarding the demand for dowry.
If the husband does not express his sexual desire to his wife, where will he go: HC
The court questioned that in a morally civilized society, if a person does not express his sexual desire to his wife or a wife does not express her sexual desire to her husband, then where will they go? The court said that in our opinion the present FIR is nothing but a fabricated story about dowry demand. The petitioner’s lawyer said that the allegations made in the FIR and the statement of the opposite party are about physical relationship and the allegations of assault made by the opposite party (wife) in the statement are about not fulfilling the sexual desire of the petitioner and not for dowry demand.
The woman had made these allegations against her husband.
According to the information, in the FIR, Pranjal Shukla has been accused of demanding dowry and abusing his wife, along with making her watch pornographic films and having unnatural sex. It was also stated in the FIR that Pranjal used to drink alcohol and watch pornographic films. Also, he used to insist on having unnatural sex with his wife and when she refused, he did not pay attention to her. Later he left his wife and went to Singapore.
The court said that these allegations were not proved by credible evidence. According to the facts of the case, the woman was married to the applicant Pranjal Shukla on December 7, 2015, according to Hindu customs. The woman accused her in-laws Madhu Sharma and Punya Sheel Sharma of demanding dowry. However, it was also clarified in the FIR that there was no demand for dowry before marriage.
