Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court found that it had been proved that the victim was forcibly kidnapped by the convict with the intention to marry and have intercourse with her. He not only outraged her modesty but also attempted to rape her by undressing her but failed due to her protest.
“The word “and” appearing in Section 482(4) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall have to be read as “or” to give effect to the intention of the legislature.”
“The Court has no words to describe its anguish against the heinous act of the victim’s father.”
“In Indian societal norms, the matters relating to sexual assault in large number of cases are not being reported by women timely… The possibility of accused taking benefit of the situation… cannot be ruled out.”
The NHRC noted that if the contents of the news report were true, it raised a serious issue of violation of human rights.
“The fact that the parties maintained a relationship for five long years would make it difficult to hold that the sexual relationship was based upon a promise to marry.”
“The evidence of the victim girl and the medical examination report prima facie do not indicate that there was any penetration or rape committed by the petitioner on the victim girl nor that he attempted to penetrate.”
“In the present case, aggrieved party that is the husband of the complainant has not made complaint of adultery before the Court; therefore, ingredients of Section 497 of the IPC have not been made out against the convict.”
“The definition of ‘rape’ excludes acts between a man and his wife, not below the age of fifteen years, performed during the subsistence of a valid marriage.”
Respondent 3 was fully aware of the bond of matrimony existing between her and the petitioner after the civil registration of their marriage and consciously decided to engage in consensual sexual interactions. So, it cannot be said that her consent for sexual relationship is vitiated by a promise to marry based on religious customs.
Despite having multiple opportunities to report the alleged acts, complainant remained silent. Her complaint came only after the pregnancy was discovered. The Court stated that these facts lend credence to the possibility that the FIR was a reaction to social pressure and the nature of the relationship was re-cast retrospectively to explain an unwanted pregnancy.
“Any compromise or settlement with respect to the offence of rape, against the honour of a woman, which shakes the very core of her life and tantamounts to a serious blow to her supreme honour, offending both, her esteem and dignity, is not acceptable to this Court.”
“It cannot be said that an 86 years-old ailing person, who is desperate to get himself treated, can confine his treatment to a particular therapy or a particular system of medicines.”
Top criminal cases on quashing of proceedings, arrest, bail, acquittal, and more.
As March comes to a close, it’s time to reflect on the significant judgments, orders, and developments from the Supreme Court. This roundup provides an overview of the top stories, important cases, and key updates that made headlines this month. It also highlights some never-before-reported judgments, notable cases from SCC Weekly, a “Know Thy Judge” feature, as well as appointments and transfers by the Supreme Court.
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts this week.
““abetment is separate and distinct offence than rape” and if the act abetted is committed in consequences of the abetment, then the person i.e. man or woman abeting such crime is liable to be punished under Section 109 of IPC.”
The accused, despite being fully aware of the age difference, actively pursued the relationship, gave assurances of marriage, and induced the victim to make financial and emotional commitments.
The Supreme Court had taken suo motu cognizance of the matter after an NGO ‘We the Women of India’ approached the Court against the impugned decision.
Supreme Court said that the High Court overlooked the fact that the Trial Court could not have recorded the settlement, and this was a suitable case for the High Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings. As a result, the parties were unnecessarily compelled to approach this Court.