Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.29 seconds)Section 6 in The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [Entire Act]
Shri. Skhemborlang Suting & Anr. vs . State Of Meghalaya & Anr. on 23 March, 2022
This Court agreeing with the above proposition has
also on similar lines allowed the prayer of the petitioners in the case of Shri.
Teiborlang Kurkalang (supra) and Shri. Skhemborlang Suting (supra) as well
as Shri. Shembhalang Rynghang (supra) which were cited by the learned
counsel for the petitioners.
Shri. Shembhalang Rynghang & Anr. vs . State Of Meghalaya on 23 March, 2022
This Court agreeing with the above proposition has
also on similar lines allowed the prayer of the petitioners in the case of Shri.
Teiborlang Kurkalang (supra) and Shri. Skhemborlang Suting (supra) as well
as Shri. Shembhalang Rynghang (supra) which were cited by the learned
counsel for the petitioners.
Ranjit Rajbanshi vs The State Of West Bengal And Others on 17 September, 2021
In the case of Ranjit Rajbanshi (supra) at paragraphs 47, 48 & 49
of the same, the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court while dealing with the technical
aspect of the POCSO Act, particularly Section 3 (a) has observed that an
7
accused cannot be said to be guilty of penetrative sexual assault if the act is
a participatory moment of passion involving the participation of both the
victim and the accused.
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Shri. Olius Mawiong & Anr. vs . State Of Meghalaya & Anr. on 19 July, 2022
In fact in a recent case, that is, Olius Mawiong & Anr v. State of
Meghalaya & Anr in Crl.Petn. No. 22 of 2022 involving a relationship and
the consequent relationship between a minor girl of about 17 years old and a
boy of about 21 years old, who had physical contact which eventually
resulted in the girl being pregnant and on being examined at the hospital, the
incident being duly reported to the police, an FIR was made to be lodged by
the mother of the alleged victim girl who has done the same reluctantly and
following the due process, a case was registered against the boy under the
POCSO Act. On an application for quashing of the related FIR and
proceedings before the Special Court (POCSO), this Court has allowed the
same. Being identical and similar to the facts and circumstances in this case,
there is no reason why this Court should not allow the prayer made in this
petition.
Shri Teiborlang Kurkalang & Anr. vs . State Of Meghalaya & Anr. on 23 March, 2022
This Court agreeing with the above proposition has
also on similar lines allowed the prayer of the petitioners in the case of Shri.
Teiborlang Kurkalang (supra) and Shri. Skhemborlang Suting (supra) as well
as Shri. Shembhalang Rynghang (supra) which were cited by the learned
counsel for the petitioners.
P.Vijayalakshmi Choudhary & Ors vs B.Baliah (D) Th. Lrs. & Ors on 2 April, 2009
16. As is evident from the authorities cited by the learned counsel for
the petitioners, wherein in the case of Vijayalakshmi (supra) at paragraphs
11 and 18 reproduced as above, the Hon'ble High Court of Madras looking
into the objective of the POCSO Act and applying the same to the fact
situation has observed that it is high time that the legislature takes into
consideration cases of this nature involving adolescents involved in
relationships and that necessary amendments under the Act has to be made,
keeping pace with the changing societal needs.
1