Madras HC | Partially deaf and mute victim voiced to have been subjected to attempt to rape: Read HC’s ruling
Madras High Court: B. Pugalendhi, J., while partly allowing the appeal modified the offence to fall under Section 354 of the Penal
Madras High Court: B. Pugalendhi, J., while partly allowing the appeal modified the offence to fall under Section 354 of the Penal
Bombay High Court: Vinay Joshi, J., altered the conviction for rape and penetrative sexual assault to an act of aggravated form of
Supreme Court: In a chilling case where a 21-year-old man was sentenced to death under Sections 302 and to life imprisonment under 376A
In a matter of the present nature it is necessary to address the normal perception and pessimism which cannot be said as being without justification.
The National Human Rights Commission issued notice to the Chief Secretary, Director General of Police and the Director-General of Prisons, Madhya Pradesh
“In such matters utmost confidentiality is required to be maintained. In our view, the High Court completely failed in that behalf.”
Allahabad High Court: A Division Bench of Rajan Roy and Jaspreet Singh, JJ., while taking suo motu cognizance of an extremely sensitive and
Uttaranchal High Court: Narayan Singh Dhanik, J., allowed a Criminal Jail Appeal which was filed from the jail against the judgment whereby
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of RF Nariman, Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ has acquitted a man in a rape case
Bombay High Court: Bharati Dangre, J., while addressing a petition with regard to the rape of a minor girl, made an observation that:
Allahabad High Court: Suresh Kumar Gupta, J., while addressing the present jail appeal held that, “…in cases involving sexual assault/rape, it is
The National Human Rights Commission, India has taken suo motu cognizance of media reports that an 18-year old Dalit girl was found
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Vijay Kumar Shukla, J., allowed the bail application filed by the applicant-accused in connection with the FIR registered
Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: A Division Bench of K.K. Wickremasinghe and Devika Abeyratne, JJ., allowed
Kerala High Court: P.V. Kunhikrishnan, J., allowed the anticipatory bail application of the applicant-accused in connection with the FIR registered for offence
Meghalaya High Court: W. Diengdoh, J., rejected an anticipatory bail application which was filed when an FIR under Section 3(a)/4 of POCSO
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Chander Bhusan Barowalia J. granted bail to the bail accused of facts and averments presented before him. The
Bombay High Court: M.G. Sewikar, J., denied bail to the applicant accused of deceiving the prosecutrix by giving false promise of marriage who
Bombay High Court: Vinay Joshi, J., granted bail to the applicants who were accused of committing offence of unnatural sex without consent and
Bombay High Court: Bharati Dangre, J., granted bail to an accused of rape in light of no prima facie case of non-consensual sexual