Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 18 (1.04 seconds)
Documents citing Chaitu Lal vs State Of Uttarakhand on 20 November, 2019

Shri. June Bordoloi @ Jun vs . State Of Meghalaya. on 11 February, 2021

27. The case of Chaitu Lal v. State of Uttarakhand: 2019 SCC Online SC 1496 cited by the State Respondent would have no relevance in the facts and circumstances of the case under scrutiny, since it has not been established that the appellant herein had used criminal force in an attempt to commit rape on the victim, to the extent of repetition, the victim herself has stated that she had hit the accused/appellant with a stone before he could do anything to her.
Meghalaya High Court Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - W Diengdoh - Full Document

Salman vs The State Govt.Of Nct Delhi on 29 January, 2021

Tihar, Delhi and in terms of the verdict of Supreme Court in "Phul Singh Vs. State of Haryana" in Criminal Appeal No. 506/1979 decided on 10.09.1979 and directions laid down by us in "Sanjay vs. State" MANU/DE/0430/2017 : 2017 III AD (Delhi) 24 dated 20.02.2017 so that the "carceral period reforms the convict" as also reiterated by this Court in "Randhir @ Malang vs. State" in Crl.A. No. 456/2017, "Chattu Lal vs. State" in Crl.A. No. 524/2017, "Afzal vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)" in Crl.A. No.996/2016, "Billo Vs. State NCT of Delhi" in Crl.A. 378/2017, "Dinesh Chand Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)" in Crl.A. No. 330/2018, "Rinku @ Ram Prasad Vs. State" in CRL.A. 865/2019, "Sanjeev Kumar vs. State (NCT of Delhi)" in Crl.A. No.643/2019 and "Manoj Tyagi Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT, Delhi)" in Crl. A. No. 93/2019, it is essential that the following directives detailed hereunder are given so that the sentence acts as a deterrent and is simultaneously reformative with a prospect of rehabilitation.
Delhi High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - A Malhotra - Full Document

Chand vs The State ( Govt. Of Nct) Of Delhi on 4 February, 2021

MANU/DE/0430/2017 : 2017 III AD (Delhi) 24 dated 20.02.2017 so that the "carceral period reforms the convict" as also reiterated by this Court in "Randhir @ Malang vs. State" in Crl.A. No. 456/2017, "Chattu Lal vs. State" in Crl.A. No. 524/2017, "Afzal vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)" in Crl.A. No.996/2016, "Billo Vs. State NCT of Delhi" in Crl.A. 378/2017, "Dinesh Chand Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)" in Crl.A. No. 330/2018, "Rinku @ Ram Prasad Vs. State"
Delhi High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - A Malhotra - Full Document

Mathura Thakur vs The State Of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite ... on 6 May, 2021

28. The present case is required to be examined in the light of the aforesaid law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court considering the various stages i.e. intention, preparation, attempt and ultimate commission of offence. The distinction has also to be kept in mind between indecent assault amounting to outraging the modesty of the victim and attempt to rape. There can be no doubt that attempt to rape is an aggravated form of indecent assault.
Jharkhand High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 0 - A R Choudhary - Full Document
1   2 Next