Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.26 seconds)

Pradeep Kumar @ Pradeep Kumar Verma vs State Of Bihar And Anr on 17 August, 2007

16. This Court considered the issue involved herein at length in the case of Uday Vs State of Karnatka AIR 2003 SC 1639, Deelip Singh @ Dilip Kumar Vs State of Bihar AIR 2005 SC 203; Yedla Srinivasa Rao Vs State of A.P.., (2006) 11 SCC 615; and Pradeep Kumar Verma Vs State of Bihar AIR 2007 SC 3059, and came to the conclusion that in the event that the accused's promise is not false and has not been made with the sole intention to seduce the prosecutrix to indulge in sexual acts, such an act(s) would not amount to rape. Thus, the same would only hold that where the prosecutrix, under a misconception of fact to the extent that the accused is likely to marry her, submits to the lust of the accused, such a fraudulent act cannot be said to be consensual, so far as the offence of the accused is concerned.....
Supreme Court of India Cites 20 - Cited by 157 - A Pasayat - Full Document

Yedla Srinivasa Rao vs State Of A.P on 29 September, 2006

16. This Court considered the issue involved herein at length in the case of Uday Vs State of Karnatka AIR 2003 SC 1639, Deelip Singh @ Dilip Kumar Vs State of Bihar AIR 2005 SC 203; Yedla Srinivasa Rao Vs State of A.P.., (2006) 11 SCC 615; and Pradeep Kumar Verma Vs State of Bihar AIR 2007 SC 3059, and came to the conclusion that in the event that the accused's promise is not false and has not been made with the sole intention to seduce the prosecutrix to indulge in sexual acts, such an act(s) would not amount to rape. Thus, the same would only hold that where the prosecutrix, under a misconception of fact to the extent that the accused is likely to marry her, submits to the lust of the accused, such a fraudulent act cannot be said to be consensual, so far as the offence of the accused is concerned.....
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 172 - A K Mathur - Full Document
1