Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.47 seconds)Section 376 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
State Of Rajasthan vs Dilshad And Aslam on 15 February, 1990
State versus Dilshad. -:: Page 36 of 36 ::-
Section 164 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Ashok Narang vs State on 12 January, 2012
24. These facts indicate that her version regarding her being raped
are false as had she been actually raped, she would have received some
injuries, maybe minor and the FSL reports would have shown the presence
of semen. When semen is not connecting the accused to the crime, there
cannot be any conviction. (Reliance can be placed upon the judgment of
the hon'ble Delhi High Court reported as Ashok Narang v. State, 2012
(2) LRC 287 (Del).
Narender Kumar vs State(N.C.T.Of Delhi) on 25 May, 2012
liable to be rejected. Prosecutrix knew the accused prior to the incident. If
evidence of prosecutrix is read and considered in totality of circumstances
along with other evidence on record, in which offence is alleged to have
been committed, her deposition does not inspire confidence. Prosecution
has not disclosed true genesis of crime. (Reliance can be placed upon the
judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court reported as Narender Kumar v.
State (NCT of Delhi), 2012 (5) LRC 137 (SC).
Kali Ram vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 24 September, 1973
In another case reported as Kali Ram Vs. State of Himachal
Pradesh, AIR 1973 SC 2773, in para 25 it was observed by Hon'ble
Sessions Case Number : 35 of 2013.