{"id":221629,"date":"2019-10-31T17:30:55","date_gmt":"2019-10-31T12:00:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=221629"},"modified":"2019-11-02T12:36:01","modified_gmt":"2019-11-02T07:06:01","slug":"jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/","title":{"rendered":"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jammu & Kashmir <\/span><\/span>High Court:<\/span><\/span><\/strong> Tashi Rabstan<\/span><\/span>, J.<\/span><\/span> upheld <\/span><\/span>the finding of <\/span><\/span>the revisional court as it was found to be <\/span><\/span>well reasoned and <\/span><\/span>no <\/span><\/span>abuse<\/span><\/span> of <\/span><\/span>process of law <\/span><\/span>was visible, <\/span><\/span>warra<\/span><\/span>nting any interference from the instant<\/span><\/span> Court<\/span><\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The petitioner <\/span><\/span>filed <\/span><\/span>the instant petition <\/span><\/span>under Section 561-A of <\/span><\/span>the Code of Criminal Procedure (\u201c<\/span><\/span>Cr.P.C<\/span><\/span>\u201d) <\/span><\/span>for setting aside the order passed<\/span><\/span> by learned Additional Sessions <\/span><\/span>Judge, Jammu whereby the order, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (Munsiff) Jammu di<\/span><\/span>scharging the petitioners<\/span><\/span> from the offences mentioned in the Challan against them by the prosecution was set aside.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

It was contended by the petitioners that they were being <\/span><\/span>falsely implicated in the FIR by <\/span><\/span>to satisfy a personal vendetta. <\/span><\/span>The <\/span><\/span>material collected by the prose<\/span><\/span>cution during the investigation did<\/span><\/span> not support the prosecution<\/span><\/span>\u2019s<\/span><\/span> case in the framing of charges under Sections <\/span><\/span>498-A, 323, 504, 506, 109 of the Ranbir Penal Code<\/span><\/span> as the petitioners No. 3 and 4 we<\/span><\/span>re not relat<\/span><\/span>ed to the husband of the<\/span><\/span> respondent<\/span><\/span> so as<\/span><\/span> to constitute the offence under Section 498-A RPC.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The counsel for the respondents while trying to defend the <\/span><\/span>Trial Magistrate <\/span><\/span>submitted that the court <\/span><\/span>could not have sifted the evidence placed before it or appreciated the evidence intrinsically at the stage of framing of charge, which was to be considered final. <\/span><\/span>It was further submitted that the <\/span><\/span>allegations in FIR and statements recorded under Section 161 of CrPC prima facie established the offen<\/span><\/span>ces with which the petitioners we<\/span><\/span>re challaned and were required to be put on trial by <\/span><\/span>framing the charge against them<\/span><\/span>.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

On p<\/span><\/span>erusal of <\/span><\/span>the <\/span><\/span>challan filed after the complete investigation, <\/span><\/span>it was found <\/span><\/span>that statements of nine witnesses recorded under<\/span><\/span> Section 161 CrPC corroborated<\/span><\/span> the allegations leveled against the petitioners in <\/span><\/span>the <\/span><\/span>FIR.<\/span><\/span> The <\/span><\/span>learned <\/span><\/span>Trial <\/span><\/span>Magistrate <\/span><\/span>had<\/span><\/span> appreciated the evidence including <\/span><\/span>the <\/span><\/span>medical report of i<\/span><\/span>njuries sustained by the respondent as if she was considering the case either to convict or acquit the acc<\/span><\/span>used. The learned Magistrate had observed that petitioner\u2019s 3 and 4 we<\/span><\/span>re not related to the husband of the respondent, therefore, the offen<\/span><\/span>ce under Section 498-A RPC were <\/span><\/span>not made<\/span><\/span> out against them, which was required to proved\/disproved by leading evidence and not a mere prima facie<\/span><\/span> case. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

The court held that a<\/span><\/span>t the time <\/span><\/span>of framing charge, the court had<\/span><\/span> to consider the final investigation report, statement of witnesses under Section 161 CrPC, documents and other evidence addu<\/span><\/span>ced by the prosecution and if they saw<\/span><\/span> that the allegatio<\/span><\/span>ns were groundless and no case was <\/span><\/span>made out against the accused, that is, if<\/span><\/span> it was<\/span><\/span> unrebutted<\/span><\/span>,<\/span><\/span> it would not <\/span><\/span>have <\/span><\/span>warrant<\/span><\/span>ed a conviction, <\/span><\/span>however, if <\/span><\/span>there were even probable chances of commission<\/span><\/span> of offence by accused persons the court needs to frame<\/span><\/span> charge<\/span><\/span>s. All this had<\/span><\/span> to be done by prima face appreciation of material on record and not by <\/span><\/span>a <\/span><\/span>roving enquiry by scanning and evaluat<\/span><\/span>ing the evidence as if the court had to decide whether the accused had<\/span><\/span> committed the offence or not.<\/span><\/span> For such limited purposes of <\/span><\/span>prima facie<\/span><\/span> satisfaction, the court may sift<\/span><\/span> through<\/span><\/span> the evidence produced by <\/span><\/span>the <\/span><\/span>prosecution to find out whether the ingredients of offences <\/span><\/span>were satisfied or not a conduct<\/span><\/span> a mini-trial by marshaling the evidence on record. \u00a0<\/span><\/span>[<\/span><\/span>Tamandeep Singh v. State of J&K<\/span><\/span>,\u00a02019 SCC OnLine J&K 855<\/b><\/a><\/span><\/span>, decided on 25-10<\/span><\/span>-2019]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Tashi Rabstan, J. upheld the finding of the revisional court as it was found to be well <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[6431,38123,31638],"class_list":["post-221629","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-beyond-reasonable-doubt","tag-prima-facie-evidence","tag-section-161-crpc"],"yoast_head":"\nJ&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same | 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\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Tashi Rabstan, J. upheld the finding of the revisional court as it was found to be well\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/\" \/>\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=\"2019-10-31T12:00:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-11-02T07:06:01+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/JK-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\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=\"3 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\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/\",\"name\":\"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-10-31T12:00:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-11-02T07:06:01+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same\"}]},{\"@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":"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same | 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\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same","og_description":"Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Tashi Rabstan, J. upheld the finding of the revisional court as it was found to be well","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-10-31T12:00:55+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-11-02T07:06:01+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/JK-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/","name":"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-10-31T12:00:55+00:00","dateModified":"2019-11-02T07:06:01+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/31\/jk-hc-prima-facie-evidence-enough-for-framing-of-charges-evidence-beyond-reasonable-doubt-is-not-required-for-same\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"J&K HC | Prima facie evidence enough for framing of charges, evidence beyond reasonable doubt is not required for same"}]},{"@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":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":31541,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/01\/04\/prosecution-must-discharge-its-burden-of-proving-the-case-beyond-reasonable-doubt\/","url_meta":{"origin":221629,"position":0},"title":"Prosecution must discharge its burden of proving the case beyond reasonable doubt","author":"Sucheta","date":"January 4, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court : Allowing an appeal preferred against the trial court verdict, A.R. Joshi, J., acquitted film star Salman Khan of all the criminal charges, and held that the prosecution failed to discharge its burden of proving the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant was alleged to have run\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\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":226448,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/03\/03\/jk-hc-court-refrains-from-making-prima-facie-decision-when-the-facts-and-evidence-of-the-matter-is-incomplete\/","url_meta":{"origin":221629,"position":1},"title":"J&K HC | Court refrains from making prima facie decision when the facts and evidence of the matter is incomplete","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 3, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu & Kashmir High Court: Ali Mohammad Magrey J., dismissed a petition under Section 561A of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking to quash an FIR. The present case relates to a petition filed for quashing of FIR and all consequential proceedings. The petitioners did not appear for the earlier\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":194932,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/04\/07\/acquittal-upheld-as-prosecution-failed-to-prove-the-case-beyond-reasonable-doubt\/","url_meta":{"origin":221629,"position":2},"title":"Acquittal upheld as prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt","author":"Saba","date":"April 7, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J., decided a criminal appeal filed by the State under Section 378 of CrPC challenging the order of acquittal of the accused persons passed by the trial court, wherein the said order was upheld holding that the\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\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":204621,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/11\/01\/section-313-crpc-can-well-be-considered-as-a-constitutional-right-under-article-21-invocation-of-last-seen-theory-sans-facts-and-evidence-does-not-shift-onus-on-accused-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":221629,"position":3},"title":"Section 313 CrPC can well be considered as a constitutional right under Article 21; invocation of last seen theory sans facts and evidence does not shift onus on accused: SC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 1, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court:\u00a0A Bench comprising of Rohinton F. Nariman and Navin Sinha, JJ. allowed criminal appeal filed against the judgment of Gauhati High Court whereby trial court's decision convicting the appellant under Section 302 IPC was upheld. The appellant was accused of murdering her husband. She was convicted by the trial\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\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":251105,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/12\/rath-yatra\/","url_meta":{"origin":221629,"position":4},"title":"Ori HC | Bail granted to a man who portrayed former CJI as Naxalite and Christian Terrorist as he refused permission for Rath Yatra last year","author":"Editor","date":"July 12, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Orissa High Court: S. K. Panigrahi J. allowed the bail application. by imposing some stricter terms and conditions and made clear that any of the observations made shall not prejudicially affect the fair trial of the present case. The petitioner is the National Chairman of Dharma Rakshyak Shri Dara Sena\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":242961,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/01\/29\/j-petition-se\/","url_meta":{"origin":221629,"position":5},"title":"J&K HC | Investigating agency to determine whether consent of prosecutrix to have sexual intercourse with petitioner was willing or it was obtained on account of false promise of marriage","author":"Editor","date":"January 29, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Sanjay Dhar J., while allowing the present bail application, observed that given to the relationship shared between the prosecutrix and the petitioner, it cannot be determined at once whether physical relationship built therein was forced or consensual. Through the present application, petitioner-accused has sought bail\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":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221629","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=221629"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221629\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=221629"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221629"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221629"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}