Back
Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ, Meenakshi Madan Rai, J
R/o Sokpay Sumshi – Appellant
Versus
State Of Sikkim – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of trial court convictions and initial case background. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. summary of rival contentions regarding investigation and evidence. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. evaluation of witness statements and prosecution evidence. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 4. legal standard for admissibility of secondary evidence/dna report. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 5. role of section 164 statement in corroborating testimonies. (Para 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 6. analysis of delay in fir and the integrity of prosecutrix's narrative. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43) |
| 7. principles applicable to evaluating rape survivor testimony, reasonable doubt, and investigation defects. (Para 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50) |
JUDGMENT
( Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ )
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.09.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge (POCSO Act), South Sikkim at Namchi in Sessions Trial (POCSO) Case No. 10 of 2015 convicting the appellant under Section 376(2)(f)/372(2)(i)/376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the IPC) and sentencing him to undergo RI of 15 years for the o
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
