{"id":218708,"date":"2019-08-28T09:48:22","date_gmt":"2019-08-28T04:18:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=218708"},"modified":"2019-09-03T17:19:00","modified_gmt":"2019-09-03T11:49:00","slug":"bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/","title":{"rendered":"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court: <\/strong>A Division Bench of Pradeep Nandrajog, CJ and Bharati Dangre, J. disposed of clubbed appeals arising out of the same criminal matter, and convicted the accused of the offence of rape punishable under Section 376 IPC.<\/p>\n

The accused was alleged to have taken away and raped the prosecutrix, who was a minor at the time of the commission of offence. He was convicted by the trial court for offences under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 IPC. On appeal to Sessions Court, his conviction under Section 376 was reversed, however, remaining part of the trial court order was confirmed. The State and the accused, both, filed appeals before the High Court.<\/p>\n

On facts of the case, the High Court held that the offence under Sections 363 and 366-A IPC were not proved against the accused. However, since the prosecutrix was 14 years of age at the time of commission of offence, her consent to the sexual act does not matter. His acquittal by Sessions Court for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC was thus reversed.<\/p>\n

Next, the Court considered that at the time of commission of offence, the accused was about 16 years of age \u2014 a juvenile. On the aspect of sentencing, it was observed:<\/p>\n

\u201dAt the time when the accused and the prosecutrix were in love and did the act which, to the misfortune of the accused, attracted the penal laws, his age was 16 years and 2 months. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2010 followed by the Act of 2015 had not come into force. Under the two Acts, the age of juvenility was enhanced from 16 years to 18 years. In the decision reported as Hari Ram v. State of Rajasthan<\/em>, (2009) 13 SCC 211<\/a>, even in pending matters before the trial court or in the appeal the benefit of said acts has to be accorded to the accused and thus deciding the three appeals today, it would be our duty to extend the benefit of Juvenile Justice Act, 2010 and 2015 to the accused. As per clause (g) of sub-Section (1) of Section 18 of the Juvenile Justice Act, the accused can, at best, be directed to be sent to Special Home for such period not exceeding three years so that the Accused can be reformed. It would be futile, therefore, to pass an order as contemplated by law for the reasons for the year 2019, the age of the accused is 38 years.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

Accordingly, the accused was convicted as aforesaid but no sentence was imposed on him since as of today, the accused was no longer a Juvenile. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.[State of Maharashtra v. Hemant Ashokkumar Mittal, 2019 SCC OnLine Bom 1670<\/b><\/a>, decided on 22-08-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of Pradeep Nandrajog, CJ and Bharati Dangre, J. disposed of clubbed appeals arising out of the <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":74381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2967,2572,13431],"class_list":["post-218708","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Juvenile","tag-Rape","tag-section-376-ipc"],"yoast_head":"\nBom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of Pradeep Nandrajog, CJ and Bharati Dangre, J. disposed of clubbed appeals arising out of the\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-08-28T04:18:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-09-03T11:49:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-08-28T04:18:22+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-09-03T11:49:00+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted","og_description":"Bombay High Court: A Division Bench of Pradeep Nandrajog, CJ and Bharati Dangre, J. disposed of clubbed appeals arising out of the","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-08-28T04:18:22+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-09-03T11:49:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/","name":"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2019-08-28T04:18:22+00:00","dateModified":"2019-09-03T11:49:00+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/28\/bom-hc-no-sentence-imposed-on-accused-convicted-under-s-376-ipc-who-was-a-juvenile-at-the-time-of-commission-of-offence-but-attained-majority-when-convicted\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bom HC | No sentence imposed on accused convicted under S. 376 IPC who was a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but attained majority when convicted"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":196471,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/28\/rape-accused-given-reduced-sentence-due-to-occurrence-of-the-offence-before-enforcement-of-criminal-amendment-act-2013\/","url_meta":{"origin":218708,"position":0},"title":"Rape accused given reduced sentence due to occurrence of the offence before enforcement of Criminal (Amendment) Act, 2013","author":"Saba","date":"May 28, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Gauhati High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Hitesh Kumar Sarma, J., convicted the accused-appellant under Section 376(1) of the IPC, and made a correction by removing Section 8 of the POCSO Act as it was discovered by this Court that the victim was a major when the act\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":208594,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/01\/22\/mp-hc-death-sentence-confirmed-as-no-mitigating-circumstances-found-in-favour-of-rape-and-murder-accused\/","url_meta":{"origin":218708,"position":1},"title":"MP HC | Death sentence confirmed as no mitigating circumstances found in favour of rape and murder accused","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 22, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: This reference was made before a Division Bench of P.K. Jaiswal and B.K. Shrivastava, JJ. by ASJ, District Sagar, along with the proceedings and record for confirmation of death sentence under Section 366(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, while the Criminal Appeal was preferred\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":278063,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/25\/delhi-high-court-statement-made-under-sec-164-crpc-disclosing-commission-of-rape-is-sufficient-to-frame-charges-under-sec-376-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":218708,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court | Statement made under Sec 164 CrPC disclosing commission of rape is sufficient to frame charges under Sec 376 IPC","author":"Editor","date":"November 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a case where revision petition was filed against the order passed by the Trial Court by which accused persons were discharged under Section 376 of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), the Single Judge Bench of Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. held that an accused should not\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Delhi-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":224757,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/30\/guj-hc-two-finger-test-violates-the-right-of-victim-to-privacy-physical-and-mental-integrity-and-dignity-held-unconstitutional\/","url_meta":{"origin":218708,"position":3},"title":"Guj HC | Two finger test violates the right of victim to privacy, physical and mental integrity and dignity; held unconstitutional","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 30, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Two Finger test Held -- Unconstitutional Gujarat High Court: A Division Bench of J.B. Pardiwala and Bhargav D. Karia, JJ., while deciding \u00a0the two clubbed appeals, held that, \u201cTwo-finger test is unconstitutional. It violates the right of the victim to privacy, physical and mental integrity and dignity.\u201d Court while analysing\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/12\/1200px-Gujarat-High-Court-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":273713,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/14\/allahabad-high-court-code-of-criminal-procedure-indian-penal-code-appeal-imprisonment-cross-examination-attempt-to-rape-informant-victim-complaint-section-376-511-ipc-section-376-ipc-section-161-crpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":218708,"position":4},"title":"Allahabad High Court observes statements of victim and informant unreliable, when not supported by medical evidence; Releases the accused convicted for Rape","author":"Editor","date":"September 14, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Allahabad High Court: In an appeal against the decision of the Trial Court whereby the accused\/appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 376 of Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) with a fine of Rs. 10,000\/- and in default thereof, to further\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Allahabad High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/allahabad_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":341170,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/12\/chhattisgarh-hc-acquits-husband-accused-having-unnatural-sex-under-s-377-ipc-with-wife-leading-her-death\/","url_meta":{"origin":218708,"position":5},"title":"Chhattisgarh HC acquits husband accused of having unnatural sex with wife under S. 377 IPC leading to her death","author":"Editor","date":"February 12, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIf the age of wife is not below the age of 15 years then any sexual intercourse or sexual act by the husband with her wife cannot be termed as rape under the circumstances, as such absence of consent of wife for unnatural act loses its importance, therefore, the offence\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Chhattisgarh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Chhattisgarh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Chhattisgarh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Chhattisgarh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Chhattisgarh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218708","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=218708"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218708\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=218708"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=218708"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=218708"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}