Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.26 seconds)

Chintyala Srinivas Home Guard Srinu, vs The Staet Of A.P., Rep By Pp., on 19 April, 2024

29. It is the case of the prosecution that police conducted rescue operation in the rented house of accused No.1, whereas so called owner of accused No.1 testified that no one complains about using of his house for unlawful activities by accused No.1. The another mediator P.W.10 not at all supported the prosecution version. In this case, admittedly, P.Ws.1 to 4 who are majors and married women, and it is settled law that before convicting a person under Sections 366 and 372 of IPC, it has to be conclusively proved that the victim was below the age of eighteen (18) years as on the date of occurrence and she was 16 minor. Thereby, this Court relied upon a judgment of this Court in Shaik Ramjan v. State rep.by S.I. of Police, Eluru II Town Police Station1.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chittaluri Vara Lakshmi Varamma, vs The State Of A.P., Rep By Pp., on 19 April, 2024

29. It is the case of the prosecution that police conducted rescue operation in the rented house of accused No.1, whereas so called owner of accused No.1 testified that no one complains about using of his house for unlawful activities by accused No.1. The another mediator P.W.10 not at all supported the prosecution version. In this case, admittedly, P.Ws.1 to 4 who are majors and married women, and it is settled law that before convicting a person under Sections 366 and 372 of IPC, it has to be conclusively proved that the victim was below the age of eighteen (18) years as on the date of occurrence and she was 16 minor. Thereby, this Court relied upon a judgment of this Court in Shaik Ramjan v. State rep.by S.I. of Police, Eluru II Town Police Station1.
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1