Jaspal Thakur vs Kanchan Chauhan And Ors on 21 June, 2025
14. This position was reiterated in Jaspal Singh Kaural v.
State (NCT of Delhi), 2025 SCC OnLine SC 742, wherein it was
observed:
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (1.11 seconds)Reserved On: 28.06.2025 vs State Of H.P. & Another on 11 July, 2025
24. A similar view was taken in Jaspal Singh Kaural v. State
(NCT of Delhi), 2025 SCC OnLine SC 742, wherein it was observed:
Satender vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. & Anr on 12 August, 2025
21. The facts in the said judgment are stated as follows:-
Md. Saif Ali Ansari vs The State Of Bihar on 12 January, 2026
(a) Jaspal Singh Kaural Vs. The State (NCT of
Delhi) & Anr. reported in (2025) 5 SCC 756.
Binod Pandit @ Binod Kumar vs State Of Odisha & Anr. .... Opposite ... on 13 February, 2026
11. Similarly, the Supreme Court in the Jaspal Singh Kaural v. State of
NCT of Delhi & Anr,2, wherein it was held that:
Leela Ram vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 2 March, 2026
21. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Jaspal Singh Kaural Vs. State
of NCT of Delhi and Another reported in (2025) 5 SCC 756 has taken
the same view.
Abc vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 21 April, 2026
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Jaspal Singh Kaural Vs. State
of NCT of Delhi and Another reported in (2025) 5 SCC 756 has
taken the same view.
Victim A vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 July, 2025
Same is the ratio of
judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Jaspal Singh Kaural Vs. State of
NCT of Delhi & another 2025 SCC OnLine SC 742, the findings recorded
by the trial Court cannot be said to be perverse calling for interference in
appellate jurisdiction of this Court.
Ashu Bhadauria vs State Of U.P. on 17 September, 2025
5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further argued that the present case is a case of consent inasmuch as the relationship between the applicant and the victim was since the last one year which was consensual. It is further submitted that the story of the applicant threatening the victim and establishing forceful physical relationship is false and incorrect. The present case is a case where there was some discussion of marriage between the applicant and the victim which could not materialize. Learned counsel for the applicant to buttress his arguments has relied upon the judgements of the Apex Court in the case of Maheshwar Tigga Vs. State of Jharkhand : AIR 2020 SC 4535, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another : 2019 0 Supreme (SC) 901 and Jaspal Singh Kaural Vs. The State of NCT of Delhi : SLP (Crl.) No.4007 of 2024. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the present case is a case of consent and under no circumstances it can be considered to be a case of rape. While placing para 23 of the affidavit in support of bail application and annexure no.S.A-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 28.8.2025, it is submitted that the applicant is reported to be involved in total number of 16 cases including the present case but in all the cases, the implication of the applicant is false. The applicant is in jail since 3.6.2023.
Victim A vs Chandradatta Dwivedi on 27 September, 2025
11. When, this aspect is taken into consideration, then in the light of
the judgment of the Hon'ble Court int he case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar
(supra) as well as Jaspal Singh Kaural (Supra) and in the case of Chandrappa
& Ors. (supra) we do not find any material to show indulgence to entertain
this appeal.