Topic Details
Topics Headnote Judgement
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? Ss 304 part II, 324, 353, 379 & 411 r/w 34 ?Offences under ? Assault on the patrolling party of forest officers ? Reversal of acquittal by High Court ? Appeal against ? Transporting stolen teak wood log clandestinely and illegally, without a pass or permit ?Allegation of ?Held, instead of confronting with the forest officers the accused-appellants would have tried to conceal their presence either by hiding themselves or by running away ? Forest officers outnumbered the culprits ? could have easily apprehended them ? Forest officers were deployed on patrolling duty ? under such circumstances, they should have been armed with weapons atleast for their own safety ? It cannot be believed, the forest officers on patrolling duty were without any weapon ? If the accused had any intention to carry away the said wooden log, they would have easily done so as after the alleged assault ?The prosecution has failed to explain the reason behind the accused-appellants not taking away the said wooden log with them ? Acquittal. (Para 23&24) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? Ss 304-B &306? Death due to drowning in a well ? No evidence of cruelty ?Allegation of keeping mistress by the Appellant ? No name or address of any such woman given by any of the prosecution witnesses ? Held, the deacesd was not used to fetching water from well and was accustomed to civil amenities which were not available in the village where she was staying ? a steel bucket was found near the well ?quite likely that the death was accidental ? the evidence of suicide itself, is unsatisfactory ?Acquittal. (Para 4, 7, 17 & 18) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Criminal Jurisprudence ? IPC ? Ss 304-B &306? Relative witness ?Held, While appreciating their evidence it must be kept in mind that the relatives of the victim who are grieved by the death, are likely to make false allegations ? their evidence is required to be examined with great care, and the omissions or contradictions in their evidence need to be appreciated properly. (Para 19) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? Ss 304-B &306? Improvements ? by witnesses over their original versions ? Implication of relatives of the husband for no reason ? There was absolutely no evidence against them, but still they came to be prosecuted. (Para 19) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? Ss 304-B &306? The implication of a number of relatives of the husband in the case which is not supported by any evidence is also a factor which is relevant in judging the reliability of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses.(Para 19) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 323 ?Conviction under ? injury established by medical evidence ? incident occurred over a trivial matter ? request for fine instead of imprisonment ? statement by complainant ?they had good relations and there was a verbal altercation over a trivial matter ? Modification in the sentence considered ? fine substituted in place of SI ? Imprisonment set aside ? CrPC ? S 357. PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 363 ? the deceased girl was found in the residence of the accused ? it was presumed that the appellant had kidnapped the deceased ? no other evidence to demonstrate that the accused had enticed the deceased to accompany him ? Statement of the deceased ? she had left her residence by her own free will? presumption is wholly misconceived ? Held, was not possible to record the guilt of the appellant u/s 363. (Para 3) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 366 ? dying declaration ? indicates that the deceased committed suicide, rather than having married the appellant by disregarding the wishes of the family ? Held, the deceased had not been persuaded or compelled to marry the accused. (Para 4) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 366-A ? Procuration of minor girl ? Whoever, by any means whatsoever, induces any minor girl under the age of eighteen years to go from any place or to do any act with intent that ? such girl may be ? or knowing that it is likely that she will be ? forced or seduced to illicit intercourse with another person ? shall be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. (Para 5) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 366-A ? Procuration of minor girl ? Essential ingredients ?an intent to force or seduce her ? ?... to illicit intercourse with another person...?. (Para 6) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 366-A ? There is no mention of any other person in the sequence of allegations levelled against the appellant ? the charge under Section 366-A not sustainable against the accused ?set aside. (Para 6) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Interpretation of Statute ? IPC ? S 375 ? Meaning of expressions ? ?against her will? & ?without her consent? ? The expression ?against her will? would ordinarily mean that the intercourse was done by a man with a woman despite her resistance and opposition ? The expression ?without her consent? would comprehend an act of reason accompanied by deliberation ? State of U.P vs Chhotey Lal ? Relied. (Para 13) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Interpretation of Statute ? IPC ? S 375 ? Consent ? construction of ? Held, submission of the body under the fear of terror ? cannot be construed as a consented sexual act ? Consent for the purpose of Section 375 requires voluntary participation not only after the exercise of intelligence based on the knowledge of the significance and moral quality of the act but after having fully exercised the choice between resistance assent ?Whether there was consent or not, is to be ascertained only on a careful study of all relevant circumstances ? the expression ?without her consent? would comprehend an act of reason accompanied by deliberation. (Para 13) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 376 ? Sexual intercourse with minor ? Held, A mere act of sexual intercourse would have established rape ?no material to conclude that sexual intercourse was committed ? charge of Section 376 would not have survived ? rightly acquitted. (Para 7) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 CrPC ? S 482? Quashing of FIR ?IPC ? Ss 376, 415 & 417 r/w 34 ?calling of marriage by the petitioners ? Allegation of rape on petitioner no.1 ? allegations in the FIR ? physical relationship without consent ? allegation of forcible sexual intercourse ?medical evidence is also prima facie suggestive of sexual intercourse? Held, no indication in FIR that the Petitioner No.1 from the very inception did not have intention to marry the respondent no.2. ?The FIR does not indicate that the Petitioner No.1 had obtained the consent of the Respondent No.2 and had induced her into entering into a physical relationship by making a false promise of marriage without having intention or inclination to marry her? subsequently refused to marry her ?would not lead to an inference that from the very inception the Petitioner No.1 did not intend to marrying her?Held, a mere breach of promise of marriage or calling off the marriage due to non compatibility or for any such reason would not per se constitute an offence under section 415 ? FIR quashed, qua petitioner nos.2 to 7 & qua the petitioner no.1 only in respect of the offence u/s 417 r/w 34 ? Held, quashing the FIR in respect of the offence u/s 376 against the petitioner no.1 at this stage would amount to rejecting the accusation made by the respondent no.2 without giving her any opportunity to prove the said allegations. (Para 15&21) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? Ss 376, 417 r/w 34 ? Petitioners are family members of accused ? No allegations in the FIR that these Petitioners had either aided or abetted the accused in commission of offence u/s 376 of the IPC ? only allegation ? they had called off the marriage between the accused & Prosecutrix and had thereby cheated her ? The FIR reveals that the imputations of cheating are made only because the Petitioners had called off the marriage ?Acquittal. (Para 16) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 415 ? Ambit of ? Two parts ? (i) the person must "dishonestly" or "fraudulently" induce the complainant to deliver any property ? (ii) the person should intentionally induce the complainant to do or omit to do a thing ? In the first part, inducement must be dishonest or fraudulent ? In the second part, the inducement should be intentional ?G.V.Rao v. L.H.V.Prasad? relied. (Para 18) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 415 ? Essential ingredient ? a guilty intention is an essential ingredient of the offence of cheating? "Mens rea" on the part of that person, must be established ?for the offence of cheating? Jaswantrai Manilal Akhaney vs. State of Bombay ? relied. (Para 18) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 IPC ? S 489-B & 489C ? Conviction under ? fake currency notes ? Discrepancy in evidence of witness, timing & about the number of notes recovered ? artificiality in the prosecution case ? material discrepancy in the evidence of panch ? Tutored witness ? Panch had remembered the serial number of the fake note and identified the note on that basis ? Held, quite improbable and indicated that the panch was a tutored one? Benefit of doubt ? Acquittal? Evidence Act ? S 3 ? Relevant fact ?relevant fact. (Para 10, 11 &17) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Interpretation of Statute ? IPC ? S 498-A ? Use of terms ? ?willful conduct?, ?likely to?, ?injury?, ?harassment? & ?unlawful demand? ? emphasize the scope, import and the ambit of the clauses in which they are used? It is not every type of cruelty that is made punishable under?Section 498A?of the Indian Penal Code. (Para 15) PDF
INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 Interpretation of Statute ? IPC ? S 498-A ? Slandered of proof ? The conduct, which is alleged to be cruel must be ?willful? ? it must be of such a gravity as is ?likely? to drive the woman to commit suicide ? or to cause grave injury to the life, limb or health ? The word ?likely? has been interpreted to show ?probability? and stands on a higher footing than a mere ?possibility?. (Para 15) PDF