Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 154 (0.82 seconds)
Documents citing State Of U.P vs Pappu @ Yunus And Anr on 1 December, 2004

Parmeshwar Raoji Ade And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 February, 2024

In Vijay @ Chinee v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2010) 8 SCC 191, the Apex Court, after referring State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain AIR 1990 SC 658, State of U.P. v. Pappu @ Yunus (supra), State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (supra), State of Orissa v. Thakara Besra (supra) and few other judgments, has held that the law that emerges on the issue is to the effect that CriAppeal-398-2002 -10- statement of prosecutrix, if found to be worthy of credence and reliable, requires no corroboration. The court may convict the accused on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix.
Bombay High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rakesh & Anr. vs State Of M.P. on 9 September, 2019

13. Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Pappu @ Yunus and Anr. reported in AIR 2005 SC 1248 has held that a prosecutrix complaining of having been a victim of the offence of rape is not an accomplice after the Crime. There is no rule of law that her testimony cannot be acted upon without corroboration in material particulars, for the reason that she stands on much higher pedestal than an 11 Cr.A. No.592/2004 & Cr.A. 682/2004 injured witness.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 0 - V Mishra - Full Document

Ram Lal Gaderia vs State Of U.P. on 2 May, 2012

15.In this case learned Amicus curiae has also submitted that the prosecutrix was found to be habitual of sexual intercourse, therefore, she was not having a good character. But in this appeal it is not to be decided whether prosecutrix was a girl of good character or not. What is to be decided is whether the appellant had committed rape with her or not ? Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. v. Pappy @ Yunus & Anr. Reported in AIR 2005 SC 1248 has held that in a rape case even assuming that the victim was previously accustomed to sexual intercourse is not determinative question. On the contrary, the question which was required to be adjudicated was, whether the accused committed rape on the prosecutrix. Learned trial court while dealing with this issue has rightly held that even if she is taken to be a girl of easy virtues even then no person gets any right to commit rape with her. In this case the medical examination of the prosecution took place on 3.6.1997 at 4.00 p.m. i.e. after about 32 hours of the alleged occurrence. In the medical examination Ext. K-4 no mark of injury on any part of the body was found, hymen was old torn healed and accepted two fingers easily. Some smelling discharge was also present there. In the pathological report no spermatozoa was found and no definite opinion about rape was given by the doctor and it was reported that she is used to sexual intercourse. While P.W.1 has stated that accused-appellant gave him a blow of kick and fell her on the ground.
Allahabad High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - S V Rathore - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next