KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR
Raju @ Hanuman – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The present Criminal Appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the appellant, Raju @ Hanuman, against the judgment and order dated 9.9.2005 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No.-II, Lucknow in Sessions Trial No. 126 of 2004 : State vs. Raju @ Hanuman, arising out of Case Crime No.478 of 2003 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-III, Lucknow, convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner stated herein-below:-
(II) under Section 366 I.P.C. to undergo 7 years’ R.I. and a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo 6 months’ additional imprisonment; and
(III) under Section 376 I.P.C. to undergo 10 years’ R.I. and a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo one year’s additional imprisonment.
All the sentences were dire
Narendra Kumar Versus State (NCT of Delhi)
Jai Krishna Mandal Versus State of Jharkhand
Tameezuddin Versus State (NCT of Delhi)
Mukarrab and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
S. Varadarajan Vs. State of Madras
Takhaji Hiraji vs. Thakore Kubersing Chamansing & Ors.
Alla China Apparao and other vs. State of A.P.
Pala Singh vs. State of Punjab
Sarwan Singh vs. State of Punjab
State of Karnataka vs. Moin Patel
Harpal Singh vs. Devinder Singh & Anr.
Munshi Prasad & Ors. vs. State of Bihar
Ram Lal Narang vs. State (Delhi Administration)
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the court must consider the reliability of the victim's testimony, the presence of serious laches in the prosecution case, and the age....
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....
Point of Law : All the factum have been discussed and dealt by the trial court in its judgment. There is no ambiguity and illegality in the judgment of the trial court.
The conviction for rape and trespass was upheld based on credible witness testimony, and the sentence was reduced considering the time elapsed since the crime.
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 judgment emphasizes the importance of protecting the rights and dignity of victims of sexual offenses, highlighting the credibility of the prosecutrix's testimony and the significance of medical ....
Rape conviction quashed due to unreliable victim testimony with inconsistencies and improvements, manipulated age records doubting minority, absent medical evidence despite multiple claims, unexplain....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.