Judgments
H.V. Nirmala & Anr. Versus R. Sharmila & Anr.
MAYA DEVI (D) THROUGH LRs & ORS. Versus STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.
State of Madhya Pradesh and others Vs. Yugal Kishore Sharma
Law Laid Down - The context in which other judgments are rendered interpreting a word appearing in a statute are not relevant for the purpose of the Madhya Pradesh Shaskiya Sevak (Adhivarshiki-Ayu) Adhiniyam, 1967. The provisions of the Act, as amended by Madhya Pradesh Shaskiya Sevak (Adhivarshiki-Ayu) Dwitiya Sanshodhan Adhiniyam, 1998 are required to be interpreted keeping in view the language, context, object and purpose of the Statute in question. The amendments in the Act so as to extend the age is Full Judgment
Istfaq Mohammad Vs. State of M.P. & others
Chingu @ Sohanlal and Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Ramadhar @ Daddi Kachhi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - (I) If, in presence of the accused at his house something wrong has happened with his wife, then in view of Section 106 of the Evidence Act, he is under burden to give a cogent explanation as to how the crime was committed. (II) Conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence. Full Judgment
LACHHMAN DASS VERSUS RESHAM CHAND KALER AND ANR
M/S INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZER CO-OPERATIVE LIMITED VERSUS M/S BHADRA PRODUCTS
ISSAC @ KISHOR VERSUS RONALD CHERIYAN AND ORS.
ORISSA LIFT IRRIGATION CORP. LTD VERSUS RABI SANKAR PATRO & ORS.
Vikram Singh Paur Late Shri Tukoji Rao Paur Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Kripal Singh Vs. State of M.P.
Law laid down - Evidence of the prosecutrix is similar to evidence of the injured-complainant or witness. The testimony of the prosecutrix if found to be reliable, per se, may be sufficient to convict a culprit and no corroboration of her evidence is necessary. In prosecution of rape, law does not require corroboration. Absence of injury – external or internal, on the body of the prosecutrix would not render the testimony of the prosecutrix unreliable. Full Judgment