Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Vivek Singh Thakur, Sushil Kukreja, JJ
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Mam Raj – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of acquittal in ipc case. (Para 1 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contentions by both parties on acquittal. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. hearing details noted. (Para 7) |
| 4. appellate court's review standards. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. principles around the evidence needed in rape cases. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. credibility of prosecutrix in sexual assault. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 7. reliability of prosecutrix's testimony. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 8. evaluation of the prosecutrix's testimony. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 9. assessment of the credibility of the evidence. (Para 21 , 22) |
| 10. findings on allegations against the accused. (Para 23 , 24) |
| 11. final decision to uphold acquittal. (Para 25) |
The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant/State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the impugned judgment dated 26.09.2014, passed by learned Special Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 03-ST/7 of 2014, whereby the accused (respondent herein) was acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 504 , 506, 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”) read with Section 3(i)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC
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
