Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Right to Promotion is Legitimate Expectation; Marriage-Based Transfer Can't Defeat It: Himachal Pradesh High Court
12 Mar 2026
Past Licenses and Undertaking Prove Knowledge of Copyright License Need, Warrant Ad-Interim Injunction: Bombay HC
13 Mar 2026
Non-Compliance on Counter Affidavits Draws Exemplary Costs Warning: Supreme Court in Gauri Maulekhi PIL
13 Mar 2026
SLPs Challenging PoP Idol Immersion Orders Disposed as Infructuous; Liberty to Assist Bombay HC: Supreme Court
13 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
ORISSA HIGH COURT
K.RAJESWAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRA No.292 of 1999
(In the matter of an application under Section 374 of the Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973)
K. Rajeswar Rao @ Raju ……. Appellant
-Versus-
State of Odisha ……. Respondent
For the Appellant : Ms. Upasika Samantaray, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Ashok Kumar Apat, AGA
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA
Date of Hearing: 28.10.2025 : Date of Judgment: 18.11.2025
S.S. Mishra, J. The sole appellant- K. Rajeswar Rao @ Raju has filed the present Criminal Appeal challenging the judgment dated 25.11.1999 passed by the learned District Judge-cum-Special Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur in G
A conviction under Section 394 IPC requires evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which is compromised by significant procedural lapses and inconsistencies in witness statements.
The prosecution's case failed due to significant contradictions in witness testimonies and procedural lapses, leading to reasonable doubt, thus necessitating acquittal.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and inconsistencies in witness testimonies and investigative delays can undermine its credibility.
The judgment underscores the necessity for prompt lodging of FIRs in sexual assault cases to ensure the integrity of evidence and the importance of consistent and credible witness testimonies in secu....
In rape cases, the credibility of the prosecutrix's testimony is paramount, and delay in filing an F.I.R. may not be fatal under particular circumstances.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt; contradictions in witness testimonies and procedural delays can undermine the case.
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
Listen Article