Back
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Rajeshwar Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rakesh Kainthla, J.—The informant filed a complaint to the police that his daughter was studying in 9th class. She had been missing since 16.09.2014. The police registered an FIR for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 363 of IPC. The date of the victim’s birth was found to be 10.01.1998 as per the school record and she was aged 16 years on the date of the incident. The victim’s mother said that the victim was in touch with Sunny and he might have kidnapped the victim. The police searched for Sunny, who disclosed that Vijay had kidnapped the victim and she was residing with him in his home. The Police searched for the victim and went to the house of Vijay, where his father was present. However, the father of Sunny concealed the victim on the arrival of the Police and did not reveal her whereabouts. The victim was recovered from Village Majhin. The police arrested Vijay Kumar. The victim was medically examined. The Medical Officer revealed that the possibility of sexual intercourse could not be ruled out. Vijay revealed on enquiry that he knew the victim. The victim was taken by Amit in his truck from Rampur to Narkanda and thereafter, to Shimla. She was t
Revisional court cannot sit as an appellate court and start appreciating evidence by finding inconsistency in statement of witnesses.
The court emphasized the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction and the requirement for a prima facie case to be made out for summoning the accused.
At the stage of framing of the charge, the accused has no right to produce any material, and the trial court has to apply its judicial mind to the facts of the case to determine whether a case has be....
The court held that the trial court improperly dismissed the application to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. without adequate assessment of witness evidence, necessitating reevalua....
Charges under Sections 363, 366 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act require proof of inducement or coercion, which was not established as the victim left voluntarily.
Revisional court cannot re-appreciate evidence to overturn concurrent acquittal absent perversity; tutored child witness admitting coaching on core penetration fact unreliable without specific corrob....
The prosecution's failure to establish the fundamental elements of kidnapping and ransom resulted in the High Court overturning the convictions due to lack of evidence and procedural irregularities.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
