Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 26 (0.32 seconds)Section 376 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 320 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 506 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 24 September, 2012
16. A contrary view has been taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of
Swantantra Kumar Jaysawal vs State, 2022 SCC Online Del 30 in
which the Court after relying upon the settled position enumerated in the
case, titled Gian Singh (supra) held that the settlement between the
complainant and the accused and their subsequent marriage does not
waive off the offence of rape.
Uday vs State Of Karnataka on 19 February, 2003
"The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uday v. State of Karnataka (2003)
4 SCC 46, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra
(2019) 9 SCC 608, Sonu v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 SCC
OnLine SC 181, Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand (2020) 10
SCC 710, Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT Delhi, in Criminal Appeal
8 CRM(M) No. 783/2021
No. 1217 of 2022 @ SLP (CRL.) No. 5806 of 2022 had held that
even serious offences such as offences under Section 376 of I.P.C
can be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties
where the parties are bound by marriage or are close family
members. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken a view that
continuation of such cases between family members and between a
wife and husband would not ensure to anybody's benefit and would
only result in further straining of ties within the family."
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs The State Of Maharashtra on 21 August, 2019
"The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uday v. State of Karnataka (2003)
4 SCC 46, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra
(2019) 9 SCC 608, Sonu v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 SCC
OnLine SC 181, Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand (2020) 10
SCC 710, Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT Delhi, in Criminal Appeal
8 CRM(M) No. 783/2021
No. 1217 of 2022 @ SLP (CRL.) No. 5806 of 2022 had held that
even serious offences such as offences under Section 376 of I.P.C
can be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties
where the parties are bound by marriage or are close family
members. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken a view that
continuation of such cases between family members and between a
wife and husband would not ensure to anybody's benefit and would
only result in further straining of ties within the family."
Scc Builders Pvt Ltd vs State Of Up on 24 April, 2017
"The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uday v. State of Karnataka (2003)
4 SCC 46, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra
(2019) 9 SCC 608, Sonu v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 SCC
OnLine SC 181, Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand (2020) 10
SCC 710, Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT Delhi, in Criminal Appeal
8 CRM(M) No. 783/2021
No. 1217 of 2022 @ SLP (CRL.) No. 5806 of 2022 had held that
even serious offences such as offences under Section 376 of I.P.C
can be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties
where the parties are bound by marriage or are close family
members. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken a view that
continuation of such cases between family members and between a
wife and husband would not ensure to anybody's benefit and would
only result in further straining of ties within the family."
Mr.Sc Gupta vs Mcd, Gnct Delhi on 27 July, 2011
"The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Uday v. State of Karnataka (2003)
4 SCC 46, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra
(2019) 9 SCC 608, Sonu v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 SCC
OnLine SC 181, Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand (2020) 10
SCC 710, Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT Delhi, in Criminal Appeal
8 CRM(M) No. 783/2021
No. 1217 of 2022 @ SLP (CRL.) No. 5806 of 2022 had held that
even serious offences such as offences under Section 376 of I.P.C
can be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties
where the parties are bound by marriage or are close family
members. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken a view that
continuation of such cases between family members and between a
wife and husband would not ensure to anybody's benefit and would
only result in further straining of ties within the family."