Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.22 seconds)

The State Of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh & Ors on 16 January, 1996

In view of the submission of Ld. APP for state and counsel for accused and material placed on record, in case of defective investigation, the court has to be circumspect in evaluating the evidence but it would not be correct to acquit the accused solely on account of defect in S.C. No. 186/1/09 Page8/24 investigation. To do so would tantamount to playing into the hands of the Investigation Officer even if the investigation is designedly defective. This view is taken in State Vs Gurmit Singh AIR 1996 SC 1393.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 1219 - Full Document

Madan Gopal Kakkad vs Naval Dubey And Anr on 29 April, 1992

Modi in his well known work "Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology" states that "to constitute the offence of rape it is not necessary that there should be complete penetration of penis with emission of semen and rupture of hymen. Partial penetration of the penis within the labia majora or the vulva or pudenda with or without emission of semen or even an attempt at penetration is quite sufficient for the purpose of the law. It is, therefore, quite possible to S.C. No. 186/1/09 Page10/24 commit legally the offence of rape without producing any injury tot he genitals or leaving any seminal stains. In such a case medical officer should mention the negative facts in his report, but should not give his opinion that no rape had been committed. Rape is crime and not a medical condition. Rape is a legal term and not a diagnosis to be made by the medical officer treating the victim. The only statement that can be made by the medical officer is that there is evidence of recent sexual activity. Whether the rape has occurred or not is a legal conclusion, nor a medical one. The above observations are quoted with approval by the Supreme Court in Madan Gupal Kakkad Vs Naval Dubey 1992 AIR SCW 1480.
Supreme Court of India Cites 27 - Cited by 406 - S R Pandian - Full Document

Siriya @ Shri Lal vs State Of M.P on 13 May, 2008

In 2008 X AD (S.C.) 645 in case titled as Siriya @ Shri Lal Vs State of Madhya Pradesh, it has been held that, "in operation of Sentencing System, law should adopt corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix facts and given circumstances in each case, the nature of the crime, in manner in which it was planned and committed, the motive for commission of the crime, the conduct of the accused, nature of weapons used and all other attending circumstances are relevant in award of sentence. Sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy in law. .......... In each case, there should be proper balancing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances on the basis of relevant circumstances in a dispassionate manner.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 73 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next