Back
SAMIT GOPAL
Krishnakant – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Samit Gopal, J.
1. The present Criminal Appeal under Section 374 (2) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 read with Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ("SC/ST Act") has been filed by the accused appellant Krishnakant against the judgment and order dated 30.11.2017 passed in Special Criminal Case No. 73 of 2014 (State Vs. Krishnakant) convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 376 Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") to 15 years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.15,000/-, under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ("POCSO Act") to 15 years Rigorous Imprisonment and fine of Rs.15,000/-, under Section 3 (1) 11 SC/ST Act to 2 years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-, under Section 506 IPC to 1 year Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. It is further ordered that in default of payment of fine under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 POCSO Act the appellant shall undergo 2 years each additional imprisonment, under Section 3 (1) 11 SC/ST Act to 2 months additional imprisonment and under Section 506 IPC to 1 month additional imprisonment. The sentences have been
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for conclusive evidence to establish the victim's age and the need for corroborative medical evidence in cases of alleged sexual as....
The trial court erred in convicting under both IPC and POCSO Act without sufficient corroborative evidence, violating Section 42 of the POCSO Act regarding sentencing options.
Medical evidence via ossification tests carries a two-year margin of error requiring the benefit of doubt to favor the accused. Testimony characterized by material contradictions and a lack of indepe....
The reliability of the victim's testimony, corroborative evidence, and the legal provisions of the POCSO Act were crucial in establishing the guilt of the appellant.
The court held that discrepancies in the victim's testimony and lack of corroborating evidence created reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
The victim's consistent statement, medical evidence, and corroborating witness testimonies are crucial in establishing the occurrence of the crime and the victim's age, even in the absence of eyewitn....
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
