Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma
Vivek Chandela – Appellant
Versus
State of NCT Of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.
1. By way of the present revision petition, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the order dated 04.06.2024 [hereafter "impugned order"] passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Fast Track Court, New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, Delhi [hereafter "Trial Court"] vide which charges were framed against the revisionist for offence punishable under Sections 328/376D/354C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter "IPC"], Section 66E of Information Technology Act, 200 [hereafter "IT Act"] read with Section 34 of IPC , Section 67A of IT Act and Section 201/174A of IPC .
2. The brief facts of the case, as per prosecution, are that on 29.09.2018, the victim had been called by one Ankit Jain and the revisionist Vivek Chandela to Twin Tree Hotel, Naraina, Delhi, for the purpose of having a party. On the same day, he had picked up the victim from Subhash Nagar Metro Station and had taken her to the said hotel in his car, where she had been accompanied by another girl, "G". After reaching the said hotel, at about 8:00–9:00 PM, Ankit Jain and the revisionist herein had allegedly forced the victim to consume alcohol. Thereafter, under the i
At the charge stage, only a prima facie case is required; minor delays in reporting sexual offences do not discredit the victim's account.
At the stage of framing charges, the truth, veracity, and the effect of the evidence are not to be meticulously examined, and strong suspicion is enough to frame a charge. The court is required to ev....
At the charge framing stage, only a prima facie case must be established, allowing for charges to be framed based on strong suspicion without detailed evaluation of evidence.
The court established that at the charge framing stage, a strong suspicion of guilt suffices to proceed, without requiring proof of the allegations.
The court affirmed that at the charge framing stage, only a prima facie case is required, emphasizing that meticulous examination of evidence is not necessary.
The court ruled that at the charge framing stage, strong suspicion suffices to proceed against the accused, prioritizing witness testimonies and circumstantial evidence over the need for conclusive p....
The absence of specific allegations against the petitioner regarding gang rape under Section 376D of the IPC necessitates the setting aside of the charge, reaffirming the need for prima facie evidenc....
The court emphasized that the determination of consent in sexual offenses must be established through trial evidence, not at the charge framing stage.
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
