Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The nature and location of the injuries inflicted, the choice of weapon, and the circumstances of the attack unequivocally establish the liability of the convict for causing the death of the deceased.”
Justice Ritu Bahri who retires on 10-10-2024, made history as upon her elevation on 04-02-2024, she became the first woman Chief Justice of Uttaranchal High Court.
The Trial Court has not recorded any finding as to how the present case is ‘rarest of the rare case’ even though the accused has committed the gravest offence.
The complaint was lodged by the victim’s mother, leading to the registration of a case under IPC and POCSO Act.
Asaram Bapu was sentenced to life imprisonment for offences punishable under Sections 376 and 377 of the IPC for raping a sevika at Surat Ashram, in the name of her promotion as an orator for religious discourses.
Supreme Court noted that this is not a case of pre-planned murder as the incident started with a fight between children for “mangoes” which unfortunately flared up when the adults of the families also got involved which ultimately led to the deceased, the father of one of the children, being killed.
Secret and restricted records and files were on found on his laptop. A software on his laptop was used for transferring important secret and sensitive classified information to the foreign countries and antisocial elements. About 4,47,734 cache files were leaked from his laptop and hard disk.
Kerala High Court hinted that evidence of sexual assault victim could be the sole basis of conviction, provided that the same was of a ‘sterling quality’.
Last year, Mukhtar Ansari was sentenced life imprisonment by court for the killing Awadesh Rai, brother of former MLA Ajay Rai
“The sword of justice given to a Judge has to be exercise with utmost responsibility and judiciously considering the reforms.”
The General Security Force Court had convicted the BSF jawan for murder and had sentenced him to life imprisonment along with dismissal from service.
Allahabad High Court said that there is a serious discrepancy in the eyewitness testimony. It does not match with other evidence, material and circumstances.
The Supreme Court held that the Court cannot be limited only to two punishments, one a sentence of imprisonment, for all intents and purposes, of not more than 14 years and the other death.
“Thrusting upon a woman the guilt of having killed a child without any proper evidence, simply because she was living alone in the village, thereby connecting with one another two unrelated aspects; reinforces the cultural stereotypes and gendered identities which the Court has explicitly warned against.”
“When the testimonies of the eye-witnesses suffer from fatal flaws, to sustain conviction on the basis of such unreliable evidence would surely amount to miscarriage of justice”
“The Trial Court has rightly convicted the accused and we do not find any illegality in the impugned judgment of conviction and therefore, the same deserves to be upheld.”
“A prominent market in the heart of the capital city is attacked and we may point out that it has not been dealt with the required degree of promptitude and attention. To our great dismay, we are forced to observe that this may be due to the involvement of influential persons.”
The accused had failed to demonstrate any illegality in the impugned judgment convicting them for the offences of kidnapping, abduction, and gang rape.
The accused father in the instant matter had allegedly committed rape on victim daughter in 2011 and 2013.
Rajasthan High Court: A Division Bench of Sandeep Mehta and Abhay Chaturvedi, JJ. contemplated an appeal where the appellant had been convicted