Judgments - Rape
HARITA SUNIL PARAB VERSUS STATE OF NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS
Khoob Singh - V/s - The State of M.P.
Sudhir Kumar Jain And Another Vs. State Of U.P. And Another
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
Dinesh s/o Ram Kishore Vyas Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Law Laid Down - Generally, the police is blamed for delay and indifferent manner but if the police officials have acted in the manner, which is expected of them, it cannot be said that the appellant has been falsely implicated. Full Judgment
ASHARFI Versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH
Vinay Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
Law laid down - (i) Conviction can be based upon the evidence of child witness and circumstantial evidence. (ii) DNA analysis report can be considered for holding the accused guilty. Full Judgment
Narbada Vs. The State of M.P
DILIP KUMAR Vs. STATE
HAMEEDULLAH MOHD AKBAR Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
GHULAM RASOOL KHAN Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) Vs. RAMTEJ
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Siddhamuni S/o Bisale Patel
Law laid down - If the testimony of prosecutrix is found trustworthy, the accused can be convicted even in the absence of evidence of lady doctor. Full Judgment