Notification
Font ResizerAa
  • Latest
    • Supreme Court
    • Madras High Court
    • Madurai Bench
  • Quick Recall
    • Arms Act
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • Evidence
    • Drugs Act
    • Cr.P.C
    • IPC
    • N.I.Act
    • PMLA
    • NDPS
    • Corruption Laws
    • General
    • Passports Act
    • Pocso
    • MCOP
    • Writ
  • Acquittal
    • S.C
    • Madras High Court
  • 3 judge bench
  • Resources
    • Notes
      • Cr.P.C 1973
      • Crimes
    • Articles
      • P.G.Rajagopal
      • AD. RAMPRAKASH RAJAGOPAL
      • Ad. Karunanithi
      • Ad. Ravindran Raghunathan
      • James Raja
    • Digest
      • Monthly Digest
      • Weekly digest
      • Subject wise
    • Bare Acts
      • BSA 2023
      • BNS 2023
      • BNSS 2023
  • Must Read
  • Author’s note
  • Legal words
  • Civil
    • s. 91 cpc
  • About
    • Terms
    • Privacy policy
    • Cancellation & Refund Policy
    • Team
  • My Bookmarks
Reading: Cheating: Non-disclosure of impotency during marriage is cheating under sections 417 and 420 IPC further direction to add the fir
Share
Font ResizerAa
  • Latest
  • Acquittal
  • Digest
  • Resources
Search
  • Latest
    • Madras High Court
    • Madurai Bench
    • Supreme Court
  • Quick Recall
    • Evidence
    • Cr.P.C
    • IPC
    • N.I.Act
    • Pocso
    • PMLA
    • NDPS
    • Corruption Laws
    • General
    • Passports Act
  • Acquittal
    • S.C
    • Madras High Court
  • Digest
    • Monthly Digest
    • Weekly digest
  • Resources
    • Notes
    • Articles
  • 3 judge bench
  • Must have
  • Author’S Note
  • Legal words
  • About
    • Terms
    • Privacy policy
    • Cancellation & Refund Policy
    • Team
  • Mobile APP
  • My Bookmarks

Get Notifications

Notification
Follow US
> Latest> Supreme Court> Cheating: Non-disclosure of impotency during marriage is cheating under sections 417 and 420 IPC further direction to add the fir

Cheating: Non-disclosure of impotency during marriage is cheating under sections 417 and 420 IPC further direction to add the fir

Madras High Court after considering the facts has held that non-disclosure of impotency during marriage is an offence under sections 417 & 420 IPC and further directed the investigation agency to add offences in the fir.
Reshma Azath April 2, 2024 6 Min Read
Share
Points
PrayerCrux of the Case & Petitioner side contentionRespondent’s Side ContentionNon-disclosure of impotency during marriage is cheatingDirection to the investigation agency to add offences in the firPartyFurther study
Prayer

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., directing the respondent police to alter the FIR in Crime No.25/2022 on the file of the respondent police station by including the Sections 420, 417 and 379 IPC therein.

Crux of the Case & Petitioner side contention

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the wife and the accused is the husband. The first accused husband without disclosing the fact that he is an impotent, married the complainant for the second time and he also received 200 sovereigns gold jewels, with things worth about Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only). After the marriage, the petitioner came to know that her husband is an impotent and subsequently, she came to know that her husband’s first marriage was ended in failure on the ground that he is an impotent. Under these circumstances, the petitioner’s husband and his family members without disclosing the entire facts, cheated the petitioner by not disclosing her husband’s impotency and showed himself as a competent person to consummate the marriage. After the truth came to light about the accused husband, having no other way, to get rid of this situation, the accused husband granted divorce by saying talak and went to U.S. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner given a complaint to the respondent Police. They registered a case in Crime No.25 of 2022 under Sections 498-A and 406 I.P.C without including the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 I.P.C, even though the allegations disclosed the fact of cheating committed by the accused persons. Hence, the petitioner filed this Petition to include the offences punishable under Sections 417 and 420 I.P.C.

Respondent’s Side Contention

The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), appearing for the respondents submitted that after receiving the complaint, a case has been registered in Crime No.25 of 2022 for offences under Sections 498-A and 406 I.P.C. Now, the matter has been referred for preliminary enquiry to Social Welfare Department, Madurai, for the purpose of conducting preliminary enquiry. After receiving the report from the Social Welfare Department, Madurai, they are ready to consider the alteration of F.I.R.

Non-disclosure of impotency during marriage is cheating

Perusal of the records reveals the fact that the petitioner is the complainant. The marriage between the petitioner and the first accused took place on 04.04.2021 at Marriott Hotel, Madurai. After the marriage, the complainant and the accused were residing at Soolaimedu, Chennai. From the inception of the marriage, the complainant found the different attitude of the husband accused and also found that he is not interested with his wife in the marriage life due to his impotency. Thereafter, the complainant came to know that due to his impotency, he got divorced from his first wife. Thereafter, the family of the petitioner’s husband also humiliated the petitioner in various manner. After the difference of opinion, the accused husband left the home on 04.01.2022 and the petitioner gave a complaint on 15.02.2022. The case has been registered on 18.05.2022. A perusal of the complaint given by the complainant clearly stated about the non-disclosure of the impotency of the husband at the time of marriage and he made the complainant to believe that he is a competent person to live ordinary life as husband and wife without Disclosing His Incapacity And Thereby, The Accused Husband Deceived The complainant and made her to marry him, as though he is competent to consummate the marriage.

Direction to the investigation agency to add offences in the fir

Therefore, this Court directs the respondent Police to add the offences under Sections 417 and 420 in the case and investigate and file the final report within four months, after receiving the report from the Social Welfare Department, Madurai. 7. With the above direction, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of.

Party

Irfana Nasreen … Petitioner vs. The State, Represented by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Thallakulam, Madurai City. (Crime No.25 of 2022) …Respondent – dated on 20th August ,2022 – Crl.O.P(MD)No.11840 of 2022 – Before The Madurai Bench Of Madras High Court – The Honourable Mr.Justice V.Sivagnanam

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/index.php/casestatus/viewpdf/835463

Irfana Nasreen .vs The State, Represented by, The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station,

Further study
  • S.C ON Cheating and breach of contract
  • False promise to marry: Marrying without witness does not imply a fraudulent marriage and having sex thereafter was the consensual one.
  • Not Rape: Though the marriage was solemnized by force the relationship between them was only after the marriage as such section 376 IPC does not emanate against the husband
  • Home
  • CHEATING – DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BREACH OF CONTRACT & CHEATING – EXPLAINED

Subject Study

  • Affidavit – Magistrate cannot take proof affidavit except N.I Act
  • Discharge Petition: Section 227 Cr.P.C: Courts must refrain from considering the grounds referring the case of the accused in discharge petition
  • BAIL – CLASS:2 – ANTICIPATORY BAIL
  • Final report: Closure report and Further investigation: Entire settled propositions discussed
  • Custody of child in Mohammaden Law: No system of adoption of child in Mohammaden law: Custody of children is the welfare of children and not the right of their parents
  • The Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Of Children Act, 2000 – An Analysis (Having Deep Connection With Juvenile Justice (Care And Protection Of Children) Act, 2015)
  • Cr.P.C., 1973. Notes no.6: General Introduction to Inquiries and Trials – Part.4 (Criminal courts powers & administration)
  • Section 84 IPC: Insanity and how to prove the same

Further Study

Supreme court quashes fir in property dispute emphasizes civil in nature and held it is impossible to appreciate how appellant deceived the respondent

Subject Study On Cheating And Criminal Breach Of Trust

Cost: Hon’ble Supreme court imposed cost on the husband to file cheating case on his wife

Quash: Cheating: Since the complainant’s filing of the FIR appears to be an attempt to misuse criminal law accused acquitted

Complaint must contain allegations on cheating

TAGGED:addition of offence in fircheatingimpotencysection 417
Previous Article Anticipatory Bail: Court is required to focus on the role attached to the accused whose application is under consideration
Next Article second or successive fir Second fir: Successive firs on the same incident not being a counter case cannot be sustained and not permissible under law
3 Comments
  • cerebrozen reviews says:
    April 3, 2024 at 10:36 am

    I genuinely enjoyed the work you’ve put in here. The outline is refined, your written content stylish, yet you appear to have obtained some apprehension regarding what you wish to deliver thereafter. Assuredly, I will return more frequently, akin to I have almost constantly, provided you maintain this climb.

    Reply
  • Hariharan k says:
    April 3, 2024 at 3:04 pm

    I can easily understand the words you have used for this work.
    Please do the same for the upcoming art works. Thank you

    Reply
  • Pingback: Understanding Bigamy and its Legal Consequences - section1.in

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Popular Study

poa personal knowledge

N.I Act: Knowledge of Power of Attorney of an individual payee must be specifically stated and in the case of company being a payee the authorised person who has knowledge would be sufficient

Ramprakash Rajagopal April 20, 2025
Discharge: When specific remedy is available under section 397 Cr.P.C the CBI ought not to have filed petition under section 482 Cr.P.C
Suicide instigation should put in such position that the victim has no other option but to commit suicide
DNA evidence: The court cannot rely on the DNA report if the prosecution fails to prove when the blood was taken from the accused for comparison
Merely witnesses are relatives of deceased is not a ground to discard the testimony

Related Study

“She told us everything” is not dying declaration instead witness must depose what exactly deceased told him/her
April 24, 2025
Supreme court explained the yardstick for sanction
March 9, 2023
PMLA: It is not necessary bail should be granted because the accused is woman
December 15, 2023
Section 138 NI Act: Unless the firm is added as primary accused the partner cannot be fasten vicarious criminal liability for firm
June 19, 2023
Article: Whether the Public Prosecutor can contradict his own witness (partly)?
January 31, 2025

About

Section1.in is all about the legal updates in Criminal and Corporate Laws. This website also gives opportunity to publish your (readers/users) articles subject to the condition of being edited (only if necessary) by the team of Advocates. Kindly send your articles to paperpageindia@gmail.com or WhatsApp to +919361570190.
  • Quick Links
  • Team
  • Terms
  • Cancellation Policy
  • Privacy Policy
  • My Bookmarks

section1.in is powered by Paperpage.             © Paperpage Internet Services.                       All Rights Reserved.

Subscribe Newsletter for free

Subscribe to our newsletter to get judgments instantly!

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

ஓர்ந்துகண் ணோடாது இறைபுரிந்து யார்மாட்டும் தேர்ந்துசெய் வஃதே முறை [541].

_திருவள்ளுவர்
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?