Back
RAJNESH OSWAL
Raman Masih – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rajnesh Oswal, J.
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 14.10.2006 delivered by the court of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Jammu (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court'), by virtue of which the learned trial court has convicted the appellant for the commission of offences under section 376, 456 RPC and has sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for seven years along with fine of Rs. 1000/- for the commission of offence under section 376 RPC and imprisonment of two years along with fine of Rs. 1,000/- for the commission of offence under section 456 RPC. In default of the payment of the fine, appellant has been directed to undergo further sentence for a period of two months.
2. The judgment has been impugned by the appellant on the grounds that the learned trial court has not appreciated the evidence in its right perspective and has wrongly convicted the appellant when the medical evidence did not support the prosecution version. It is also stated that once the appellant was acquitted of the charge for the commission of offence under section 4/25 Arms Act, the appellant could not have been convicted for the commission of offences under section 376, 456
Procedural irregularities in evidencing and the importance of corroborative medical evidence are crucial for just outcomes in sexual assault cases, as unsupported claims cannot sustain a conviction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to prove the age of the prosecutrix and the reliability of her testimony beyond reasonable doubt, along with th....
The prosecution failed to establish the age of the prosecutrix beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the accused's acquittal due to the principle of benefit of doubt.
Onus of prosecution cannot be discharged by referring to very strong suspicion and existence of highly suspicious facts to inculpate accused nor falsity of defence could take place of proof which pro....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving discrepancies in evidence and inconsi....
The court established that consent and age are critical in abduction cases, and the prosecution must prove intent to abduct for illicit purposes under IPC sections 363 and 366.
Rape of minor girl – Delay in FIR - threats administered by the appellant of circulating the MMS and of defamation of the family, are all factors to be considered, for delay in lodging the FIR – Conv....
The prosecution must prove an accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and significant delays or contradictions in testimonies can undermine 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
