Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 332 (1.04 seconds)
Documents citing Aman Kumar And Anr vs State Of Haryana on 10 February, 2004

Periasamy vs State Represented By on 21 December, 2017

The above dictum was subsequently reiterated by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Aman Kumar and another vs. State of Haryana (2004) 4 SCC 379 which was relied on by the trial court in the Judgment, which is impugned in this appeal. The above decision of the Honourable Supreme Court would further indicate that even in the absence of any semen in the private parts of the female organ, there is every possibility for committing the offence of rape. In the present case, the trial Court acquitted the accused from the offence of Section 376 of IPC, against which no appeal has been filed by the State. The trial Court only convicted the accused for the offences punishable under Section 5 (m) and (n) read with Section 6 of the POSCO Act.
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - R Subbiah - Full Document

State vs Ravi @ Bhonda Etc. ­Sc No. 85/2010 1/32 on 5 March, 2012

In 'Aman Kumar and another vs State of Haryana' , it was observed that discrepancies were irreconcilable . In this case, evidence of the father of the prosecutrix showed that his wife had told him that prosecutrix was teased by accused persons and evidence of prosecutrix and Doctor did not specifically refer to penetration. Neither rape nor attempt to rape was established.
Delhi District Court Cites 31 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sc: 128/09 State vs . Bhagat on 8 October, 2009

In Aman Kumar & Anr. vs. State of Haryana (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under :­ The act of pulling a woman, removing her dress coupled with a request for sexual intercourse, is such as would be an outrage to the modesty of a woman, and knowledge, that modesty is likely to be outraged, is sufficient to constitute the offence without any deliberate intention having such outrage alone for its object.
Delhi District Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sumit Gupta vs State on 20 March, 2009

21. Learned counsel for the appellant has further assailed the judgment on the ground that neither there is any allegation by the prosecutrix nor has the doctor opined that there was any penetration or even an attempt of penetration by the appellant. Whereas, to constitute an offence of rape, penetration is sine qua non. The Apex Court in the case of Aman Kumar Vs. State of Haryana reported at 2004 SCC (Crl.) 1266 has held that if in the evidence of the prosecutrix or Doctor, there is no specific mention of penetration, then the offence of rape is not made out. Moreover, the independent witnesses (DW-1 and DW-2) have clearly stated that no such incident of rape/molestation had ever taken place. The prosecutrix and her parents were examined and there are major contradictions in the three statements of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3, which itself show that no such incident, as alleged, had taken place.
Delhi High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 2 - G S Sistani - Full Document

Rajesh Kumar Dubey vs State Of U.P. on 16 November, 2022

In Aman Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana (2004) 4 SCC 379, the Supreme Court observed as under: (SCC para 8, page 387) "8. The plea relating to applicability of Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC needs careful consideration. In every crime, there is first, intention to commit, secondly, preparation to commit it, thirdly, attempt to commit it. If the third stage, that is, attempt is successful, then the crime is complete. If the attempt fails the crime is not complete, but law punishes the person attempting the act. Section 511 is a general provision dealing with attempts to commit offences not made punishable by other specific sections. It makes punishable all attempts to commit offences punishable with imprisonment and not only those punishable with death. An attempt is made punishable, because every attempt, although it falls short of success, must create alarm, which by itself is an injury, and the moral guilt of the offender is the same as if he had succeeded. Moral guilt must be united to injury in order to justify punishment. As the injury is not as great as if the act had been committed, only half the punishment is awarded."
Allahabad High Court Cites 57 - Cited by 1 - S K Pachori - Full Document

State Of Sikkim vs Padam Bahadur Panday (Chettri) on 29 October, 2021

8.(i) The Learned Public Prosecutor harped on the Victim being a sterling Witness. It was also submitted that penetration need not be full penetration. Not only is penetration a sine qua non for the offence of rape but in order to constitute penetration, there must be clear and cogent evidence to prove that some part of the virile member of the accused was within the labia of the pudendum of the woman, no matter how little (See Aman Kumar and Another vs. State of Haryana supra). However, the evidence of the Victim before the Learned Trial Court, her Medical Examination and that of the Respondent, as also the Forensic Evidence do not support the Prosecution allegation of penetration. At the same time, it is necessary to observe that a sterling Witness is one whose oral testimony is cogent, reliable, convincing and trustworthy for it to be accepted by the Court.
Sikkim High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - M M Rai - Full Document

Panditi Lakshmareddy vs The State Of A.P. on 8 April, 2022

"8. The counsel of the accused appellant has pleaded that the actions of the accused appellant do not constitute the offence under Section 511 read with Section 376, as the accused appellant had not committed any overt act such as; any attempt to undress himself in order to commit the alleged act. This Court in the case of Aman Kumar and Anr. v. State of Haryana, (2004) 4 SCC 379 held that "11. In order to find an accused guilty of an attempt with intent to commit a rape, court has to be satisfied that the accused, when he laid hold of the prosecutrix, not only desired to gratify his passions upon her person, but that he intended to do so at all events, and notwithstanding any resistance on her part..."
Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati Cites 33 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next