Judgments - Rape
Nagina Alias Jhinna Vs State Of U.P. And Anr.
STATE OF M.P. Vs. MUNNA @ SHAMBHOO NATH
In view of the evidence on record and the rationale in the aforementioned cases, we are of a considered view that the prosecution has totally failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the girl was less than 16 years of age at the time of the incident. Therefore, it can be held that the girl was more than 16 years of age and she was competent to give her consent Full Judgment
Vinod Valmiki Vs State Of U.P. And 5 Ors
State of Himachal Pradesh Versus Lekh Ram
Dushyant Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh
PARHLAD AND ANR. Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA
STATE OF M.P. Vs. ANOOP SINGH
With respect to this finding of the High Court, we are of the opinion that the High Court should have relied firstly on the documents as stipulated under Rule 12(3)(b) and only in the absence, the medical opinion should have been sought. We find that the Trial Court has also dealt with this aspect of the ossification test. The Trial Court noted that the respondent had cited Full Judgment
STATE OF M.P. Vs. MADANLAL
PURUSHOTTAM DASHRATH BORATE & ANR. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
RAVINDRA Vs. STATE OF M.P.
In light of the discussion in the foregoing paragraphs, we are of the opinion that the case of the appellant is a fit case for invoking the proviso to Section 376(2)(g) of IPC for awarding lesser sentence, as the incident is 20 years old and the fact that the parties are married and have entered into a compromise, are the adequate and special reasons. Full Judgment
BHAVANBHAI BHAYABHAI PANELLA Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT
The only question which survives for consideration is the sentence to be awarded- Having regard to the totality of circumstances, we are of the view that ends of justice will be met if the sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to RI for ten years. However, sentence of fine and compensation as also default sentence and direction for recovery of the amount payable as compensation are Full Judgment