The Delhi High Court upheld the Trial Court’s decision of awarding life imprisonment to a man convicted for murdering his wife and assaulting his daughter.
Allahabad High Court observed that Section 201 IPC looks upon a person giving false information with intent to screen an offender as an accessory after the fact and makes him culpable as an offender committing an offence against public justice. It partly allowed the appeal against conviction under Section 201 IPC, but upheld the conviction for murder.
A Child-in-conflict with law (CIL) was granted bail considering that she was a young girl; her family was poor; she had less understanding to distinguish between right and wrong and her family atmosphere was good. The Court also discussed situations in which a CIL could be denied bail even in bailable offences as per Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
In the present case, a victim of sexual assault, aged about 13 years, had filed a writ petition forterminating her pregnancy caused due to illegal act perpetuated upon her.
The Telangana High Court upheld the conviction of a husband under Section 498A of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) despite there being contradictions in the dying declarations as there were consistent statements about abuse and cruelty committed on the wife in all the dying declarations.
Delhi High Court: In a case where revision petition was filed against the order passed by the Trial Court by
Delhi High Court: In an appeal challenging the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge convicting the Father (Appellant) under
Allahabad high Court: In a case under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (‘POCSO’ Act), Ajay Bhanot, J.
Karnataka High Court: In the instant petition for quashment, the issue arose that whether a legal heir should be permitted to come
Delhi High Court: While granting bail to the person accused of offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO),
Allahabad High Court: In an appeal against the judgment passed by the Special Judge acquitting the accused persons in Babri
Constitution of India — Art. 21 — “Victim” of crime: Scope of rights of “victim” of crime, to participate in
Allahabad High Court: In an appeal against the decision of the Trial Court whereby the accused/appellant has been convicted and sentenced to
Delhi High Court: C Hari Shankar, J. opined that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 will apply in respect
Sexual abuse resulting in tying of knot between the victim and the accused in violation of provisions of law or birth of a child, does not mitigate the act of the petitioner in any manner, since the consent of a minor is immaterial and inconsequential in law
Supreme Court: In a highly controversial extortion case of about Rs. 200 crores in Delhi’s Tihar jail, the 3-judge Bench of Uday
Meghalaya High Court: W. Diengdoh, J. allowed a petition which was filed with a prayer to set aside and quash the criminal
Supreme Court of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: The Full Bench of P. Padman Surasena, E.A.G.R Amarasekara and A.H.M.D Nawaz,
Gujarat High Court: Paresh Upadhyay, J., allowed an appeal which was filed against the judgment and order passed by the Special Judge
The National Human Rights Commission, NHRC, India, in order to ensure effective prosecution leading to conviction in cases of sexual assault on