Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 14 (0.29 seconds)
State vs . Ravitosh @ Vinay Page No. 1/22 on 6 January, 2016 cites

Uday vs State Of Karnataka on 19 February, 2003

In the case of Uday vs. State of Karnataka, 2003 (1) JCC 506, the prosecutrix and the accused were deeply in love. They used to meet often. She went out with the accused to a lonely place at night. The accused had also made promise on more than one occasion to marry her. It was held that in such circumstances, the promise loses all significance particularly when they are overcome with emotions and passions and find themselves in situations and circumstances where they, in a weak moment, succumb to the temptation of having sexual relationship. This is what appears to have happened in this case as well and the prosecutrix had willingly consented to having sexual intercourse with the accused with whom she was deeply in love but not because that he promised to marry but also she desired it. In these circumstances, it would be very difficult to impute to the accused knowledge that the prosecutrix had consented in consequence of a misconception of a fact arising from his promise. The observations made in the case supra have relevance in this case.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 736 - B P Singh - Full Document

Rohit Chauhan vs State Nct Of Delhi on 22 May, 2013

22. It was observed in the case of Rohit Chauhan vs. State NCT of Delhi, 2013, Bail application no. 311/2013 dated 22.05.2013 in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi that there may be cases where both persons out of their own will and choice develop a physical relationship. Many of the cases are being reported by those women who have consensual physical relationship but when the relationship breaks due to one or the other reason, the woman uses the law as a weapon for vengeance and personal vendetta and sometimes even to force the boy to get married to her.
Delhi High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 43 - K Gambhir - Full Document
1   2 Next