Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S.K.SAHOO
Satrughna Samal – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the case and initial verdict (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. charges framed and evidence presented (Para 6 , 7 , 22) |
| 3. examination of prosecution witnesses (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 4. defense arguments presented (Para 23 , 24) |
| 5. court analysis on elements of kidnapping and abduction (Para 25 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 6. victim's age and credibility of evidence (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 7. critique of medical examination practices (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 8. decision to acquit the appellant (Para 42) |
| 9. final conclusions and order of the court (Para 43 , 44 , 45 , 46) |
JUDGMENT :
1.The appellant Satrughna Samal faced trial in the Court of learned Assistant Sessions Judge (Special Track Court), Cuttack in S.T. Case No.178 of 2014 for commission of offences punishable under sections 366-A/376 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter ‘I.P.C.’) on the accusation that on 16.08.2010 the appellant induced the victim girl (P.W.8), who is the minor daughter of the informant (P.W.3), to go from her house situated at village Safa under Tangi police station, Cuttack to somewhere with intent that the victim may be (or knowing that it is likely
The court ruled that in the absence of evidence proving the victim's age under eighteen and her voluntary conduct with the accused, charges of kidnapping and rape were unproven.
(1) Consensual sexual intercourse is not rape.(2) Rape – Two finger test in private part of victim is not permissible under law.
The conviction of a minor for kidnapping and repetitive rape is upheld when credible evidence establishes the victim's minority and the accused's actions contravene statutory provisions regarding chi....
(1) Mere recovery of a child from some other person ipso facto does not to prove offence under Section 363, IPC – Prosecution has to prove that accused either took or enticed minor out of keeping of ....
Prosecution must prove age in POCSO cases; failure to establish victim's age led to acquittal, highlighting valid consent under misconception as key in sexual assault cases.
Rape – Consent of minor has no legal sanctity.
(1) Defence is not required to prove its plea beyond all reasonable doubts, but when inconsistent pleas have been taken by defence, same cannot be accepted.(2) Statement of a witness recorded under S....
The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused kidnapped the victim with the intent to compel her to marry or to seduce her to illicit intercourse, and mere allegations without....
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
