Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
UDAI PAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant's conviction for rape stemming from sexual relations with a minor. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments from both sides regarding the prosecutrix's age and evidence. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. inconsistencies in evidence contradicting prosecutrix's age determination for the offence. (Para 11 , 12 , 18 , 25) |
| 4. highlight of the need for conclusive evidence in age matters for consent. (Para 24) |
| 5. acquittal of the appellant due to insufficient evidence proving the prosecutrix's age. (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant, Udaipal, under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereafter ‘ Cr.P.C .’], seeking setting aside the judgment of conviction dated 22.05.2006 [hereafter ‘impugned judgment’] and the order on sentence dated 27.05.2006 [hereafter ‘impugned order on sentence’] passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi [hereafter ‘Trial Court’] in Sessions Case No. 40/2006, arising out of FIR No. 426/2005, registered at Police Station Mayur Vihar, Delhi, for offences punishable under Sections 363 /366/376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [hereafter ‘ IPC ’]. By
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
