Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.26 seconds)
Dharam Yadav & Anr vs The State Of Bihar on 14 May, 2018 cites

Tulshidas Kanolkar vs The State Of Goa on 27 October, 2003

"24. When the matter is examined in the aforesaid perspective, which in the opinion of this Court is the right perspective, reluctance on the part of the prosecutrix in not narrating the incident to anybody for a period of three years and not sharing the same event with her mother, is clearly understandable. We would like to extract the following passage from the judgment of this Court in Tulshidas Kanolkar v. State of Goa[(2003) 8 SCC 590]:
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 154 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Bhupinder Sharma vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 16 October, 2003

To insist on corroboration, except in the rarest of rare cases, is to equate one who is a victim of the lust of another with an accomplice to a crime and thereby insult womanhood. It would be adding insult to injury to tell a woman that her claim of rape will not be believed unless it is corroborated in material particulars, as in the case of an accomplice to a crime. Why should the evidence of the girl or the woman who complains of rape or sexual molestation be viewed with the aid of spectacles fitted with lenses tinged with doubt, disbelief or suspicion? The plea about lack of corroboration has no substance {See Bhupinder Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2003) 8 SCC 551}. Notwithstanding this legal position, in the instant case, we even find enough corroborative material as well, which is discussed hereinabove."
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 233 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next