Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.28 seconds)
Documents citing The State Of Rajasthan vs Arvind Beniwal on 31 August, 2022

State vs Raju on 22 February, 2025

17. Perusal of testimony of PW Seema Singh and PW2 Bhola shows that both the witnesses have stated that victim Seema went out voluntarily from her home with the accused as they loved each other. Thereafter, both the victim and the accused got married to each other. During their cross examination by Ld. APP for the State, both the witnesses have stated that accused did not kidnap the victim forcefully and that accused never enticed the victim to leave her guardian care and protection. It is further admitted during cross examination that the date of birth which was mentioned in her Aadhar card was wrongly mentioned and that she was more than 18 years old on the day when she went out of her home to live along with the accused. The Court is not inclined to conduct an enquiry regarding the age of the victim girl as no useful purpose would be served. Even if it is presumed that the Aadhar card bears her correct date of birth, the Court is not oblivious of the fact that she had gone along with the accused Digitally signed by VIVEK BENIWAL FIR No. :31/2015 VIVEK Date: STATE Vs. Raju BENIWAL 2025.02.27 PS : Badarpur 16:49:13 +0530 Pages 6 of 7 out of the protection of her lawful guardian on her own free will. The statement of the victim nowhere shows that the accused had induced her to leave her parents protection and come along with him.
Delhi District Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Rajanti on 17 March, 2025

"The recovery was from a street with houses on both sides and shops nearby. And, yet no witness from the public has been produced. Not that in every case the police officials are to be treated as unworthy of reliance but their failure to join witnesses from the public especially when they are available at their elbow, may, as in the present case, cast doubt. They have again churned out a stereotyped version. Its rejection needs no Napoleon on the Bridge at Arcola.'' Digitally signed by VIVEK State Vs. Rajanti VIVEK BENIWAL Date: BENIWAL 2025.03.20 FIR No. 39/2020, PS: Badarpur 17:08:55 Page no. 9 of 12 +0530
Delhi District Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State vs Roshan on 27 March, 2025

Thereafter, they all along with the accused and case property came back to the police station where he deposited the case property into the malkhana and besides this PW3 deposited his seal into the Malkhana after taking it back from HC Mahabir who was already present in the PS. In the meanwhile, the accused was sent to hospital for medical examination and after his medical examination he was again brought to the P.S where PW3 put him into the lockup. Thereafter, PW3 recorded the statement of all the concerned police officials under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, PW3 produced the accused before this Court and from there he was sent to the judicial custody. Thereafter, after completing the Digitally signed by VIVEK State Vs. Roshan VIVEK BENIWAL Date: BENIWAL 2025.04.02 FIR No. 373/2019, PS: Badarpur 15:30:40 +0530 6 of 14 investigation, he prepared the charge sheet and produced the same before this Court. This witness correctly identified the accused in the Court and the buttandar knife. This witness was cross examined and discharged.
Delhi District Court Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1