Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SAMIT GOPAL
Gauru @ Gaurav – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis for the charges (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 2. judicial reasoning for acquittal (Para 24 , 32) |
| 3. arguments on erroneous trial court procedures (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 4. court's evaluation of evidence and legal standards (Para 30 , 31) |
| 5. conclusion and order for acquittal (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
1. List revised.
3. Notice was issued to the opposite party no. 2 vide order dated 15.3.2023. Office vide its report dated 06.5.2023 reported that notice has been served personally on the opposite party no. 2 as per the report of C.J.M. concerned which is dated 28.3.2023. Service of notice is thus sufficient. Despite service no one appears on her behalf even in the revised list.
5. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/accused - Gauru @ Gaurav against the judgement and order dated 10.01.2020 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 9, Agra in Special Case No.190 of 2018 (State vs. Gauru @ Gaurav), Case Crime No. 318 of 2017, P.S.- Lohamandi, District- Agra, by which he has been convicted and sentenced for the offences under Section 376 read with (2)(i) I.P.C. to 14 years rigorous imprisonment
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.
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 need for strong, compelling, and reliable evidence to prove the guilt of the accused in a criminal case, and the distinction between the trial of Sessions case and the trial held before the Judic....
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the quality of evidence is essential in criminal law.
The conviction under the POCSO Act requires substantial evidence beyond mere suspicion; failure to prove such evidence necessitates acquittal.
The court upheld the conviction for rape under IPC and POCSO Act, emphasizing the credibility of the victim's testimony and the need for sensitivity in child sexual assault cases.
The court affirmed that prior legal standards apply to convictions, emphasizing the necessity of valid evidence and proper assessment of child witnesses' competency in sexual assault cases.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for conclusive evidence to establish the commission of offenses, especially in cases involving serious allegations such as rape,....
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
