Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 136 (1.31 seconds)
Documents citing Thakorlal D. Vadgama vs The State Of Gujarat on 2 May, 1973

Sachin Thakur vs State Of H.P on 5 March, 2021

26. Fifth, unlike in the cases of State of Haryana v. Raja Ram [(1973) 1 SCC 544 ] and Thakorlal D. Vadgama v. State of Gujarat [(1973) 2 SCC 413], there is no grotesque misuse of power, wealth, status or age which needs to be guarded against. Both the prosecutrix and the appellant belonged to a similar social class and lived in geographical and cultural vicinity to each other. Far from there being an imbalance of power; if not for the age of the prosecutrix, the two could have been happily married and cohabiting today. Indeed, the present instance is an offence: mala prohibita, and not mala in se. Accordingly, a more equitable sentence ought to be awarded.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 1 - A Chitkara - Full Document

Vivek Kumar @ Gotia vs State Of H.P on 27 June, 2025

"13. A perusal of Section 361 IPC shows that it is necessary that there be an act of enticing or taking, in addition to establishing the child's minority (being sixteen for boys and eighteen for girls) and care/keep of a lawful guardian. Such "enticement" need not be direct or immediate in time and can also be through subtle actions like winning over the affection of a minor girl. [Thakorlal D. Vadgama v. State of Gujarat, (1973) 2 SCC 413, para 10: 1973 SCC (Cri) 835] However, mere recovery of a missing minor ::: Downloaded on - 27/06/2025 21:29:27 :::CIS 24 (2025:HHC:20095) from the custody of a stranger would not ipso facto establish the offence of kidnapping. Thus, where the prosecution fails to prove that the incident of removal was committed by or at the instigation of the accused, it would .
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 61 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Anversinh @ Kiransinh Fatesinh Zala vs The State Of Gujarat on 12 January, 2021

26. Fifth, unlike in the cases of State of Haryana v. Raja Ram7 and Thakorlal D. Vadgama v. State of Gujarat 8, there is no grotesque misuse of power, wealth, status or age which needs to be guarded against. Both the prosecutrix and the appellant belonged to a similar social class and lived in geographical and cultural vicinity to each other. Far from there being an imbalance of power; if not for the age of the prosecutrix, the two could have been happily married and cohabiting today. Indeed, the present instance is an offence: mala prohibita, and not mala in se. Accordingly, a more equitable sentence ought to be awarded.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 91 - S Kant - Full Document

Shajahan vs State Of Kerala on 29 July, 2010

In this context it will be apposite to refer to the following passage in Varadarajan which has been referred to by the later two Judge Bench in T.D.Vadgama v. State of Gujarat [AIR 1973 SC 2313] to ascertain the precise distinction in the dictum between the 3 Judge Benches in Varadarajan and Rajaram. The dictum in Varadarajan turned on its own peculiar facts. The learned Judge said so in paragraph 10 as follows:
Kerala High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - R Basant - Full Document

The State Of Karnataka vs Mounesh @ Mohana on 19 December, 2023

need not be direct or immediate in time and can also be through subtle actions like winning over the affection of a minor girl (Thakorlal D. Vadagama v. State of Gujarat, (1973) 2 SCC 413). However, mere recovery of a missing minor from the custody of a stranger would not ipso facto establish the offence of kidnapping. Thus, where the prosecution fails to prove that the
Karnataka High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - H P Sastry - Full Document

Reserved On: 31.07.2025 vs State Of H.P on 20 August, 2025

"13. A perusal of Section 361 IPC shows that it is necessary that there be an act of enticing or taking, in addition to establishing the child's minority (being sixteen for boys and eighteen for girls) and care/keep of a lawful guardian. Such "enticement" need not be direct or immediate in time and can also be through subtle actions like winning over the affection of a minor girl. [Thakorlal D. Vadgama v. State of Gujarat, (1973) 2 SCC 413, para 10: 1973 SCC (Cri) 835] However, mere recovery of a missing minor from the custody of a stranger would not ipso facto establish the offence of kidnapping.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 73 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next