SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1975 Supreme(Del) 3

M.R.A.ANSARI
BHUPINDER KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF DELHI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.C.MATHUR, Hari Chand

M. R. A. Ansari

( 1 ) BHUPINDER Kumar Bhatnagar, the petitioner herein, and another by name, Parmod Kumar, were committed by the Metropolitan Magistrate. Delhi to take their trial in the Court of Session and a charge has been framed against the petitioner for an office under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner has filed the present revision petition against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 5. 6. 1974 framing the charge against the petitioner.

( 2 ) THE order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge framing the charge is being challenged on the ground that the material on record did not make out a prima facie case against the petitioner for an offence under section 376 Indian Penal Code inasmuch as in the statements. made by the proscutrix under Ss. 161 and 164 Cr. P. C. she had not implicated the petitioner by name and the description of the petitioner given by her in such statements did not tally with the description of the petitioner and further that in the statement of the prosecutrix before the committing Magistrate, she did not identify the petitioner as the person who had committed rape on her.

( 3 ) A. preliminary objection has, howeve






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top