Back
A. BADHARUDEEN
Prakashan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
A. Badharudeen, J.
This revision petition has been filed under Sections 438 ad 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, challenging judgment in Crl.Appeal No.41/2024 on the files of Sessions Court, Palakkad, arising out of the judgment in C.C.No.868/2018 on the files of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class-II, Palakkad.
2. Revision petitioner herein is the sole accused in the above case.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner/accused and the learned Public Prosecutor on admission.
4. The prosecution case in a nut shell is that the accused/revision petitioner, who is a resident of Mankara, Palakkad, continuously followed the defacto complainant, a lady working in a school as a teacher by profession and contacted her even though she had given clear indication that she had no interest towards the accused. This is the base on which prosecution alleges commission of offence punishable under Section 354-D of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC’ for short).
5. On getting the final report filed by the Investigating Officer, the learned Magistrate proceeded with trial after completing pre-trial formalities. During trial, PW1 to PW5 were examined and Exts.P1 to P5 w
The court established that repeated contact with a woman despite her disinterest constitutes stalking under IPC Section 354-D.
(1) Quashment proceeding – To exercise inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C is not the rule but it is an exception which can be applied only if it appears to Court that miscarriage of justice w....
Point of Law : Section 509 reads word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman.
The unshaken testimony of the victim and corroborating witnesses, lack of motive for false implication, and consistent evidence formed the basis for establishing the guilt of the appellant.
The prosecution failed to prove the offence of stalking under Section 354-D due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in the victim's testimony.
Procedural lapses in the recording of victim statements do not invalidate the prosecution's case if sufficient evidence independently establishes guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
In sexual assault cases, the evidence of the victim must be credible, and sentences for related offences must comply with Section 71 IPC to avoid dual punishment.
Lack of specific allegations or direct involvement in stalking or insulting modesty leads to quashing of criminal proceedings under IPC.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; mere allegations and inconsistent testimonies do not suffice for a conviction.
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
