1. Rajkumar Narayan Tandel was accused of stalking and sexually harassing a woman in S.K. Patil Garden in Mumbai on September 18, 2021.
2. According to the prosecution, Tandel followed the woman in the garden and exposed his genitals to her. When the woman called for help, two witnesses helped restrain Tandel until the police arrived.
3. The court examined five prosecution witnesses, including the complainant, two eyewitnesses, and two police officers. Based on the evidence, the court found Tandel guilty of stalking, outraging the woman's modesty, and committing indecent exposure, and convicted him.
This document is a court order from a case involving multiple accused persons. It summarizes proceedings from a hearing where the prosecution requested more time for further investigation into the case. The court allowed more time but imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 to be split among the accused, noting delays in the investigation. It also ordered the Secretary of Home Affairs to inquire about responsibility for the costs being imposed and deducting the amount from the responsible officer's salary. The case was adjourned to a future date for further proceedings.
Kerala hc order d rajagopal-v-ayyappan-anr-402210ZahidManiyar
This document summarizes two criminal revision petitions filed in the High Court of Kerala against judgments from lower courts. The lower courts had found police officers guilty of assaulting a complainant while he was in custody. The police officers argue on appeal that the lower courts erred in not requiring sanction from the state government before prosecuting public servants. The High Court examines the evidence and finds that the injuries occurred while the complainant was in police custody, supporting his allegation that police assaulted him at the police station lockup. Medical evidence also supports the complainant's version of events. The High Court dismisses the criminal revision petitions filed by the police officers.
This document provides a summary of a Supreme Court of India case regarding an appeal against convictions for offenses under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code. The key details are:
1) The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Court and High Court for raping a 19-year-old blind Scheduled Caste woman.
2) The Supreme Court affirmed that the offense of rape under Section 376(1) IPC was proven beyond reasonable doubt based on testimony and medical evidence.
3) However, it examined the appellant's argument that the ingredients of the offense under Section 3(2)(v
This document summarizes a court case appeal regarding the rejection of a bail application.
The appellant, Harshvardhan Yadav, has appealed the rejection of his bail by the lower court in a rape case filed against him by the informant, a police constable. The appellant argues the sexual act was consensual while the prosecution claims it was rape.
The court discusses past judgments on similar cases to determine if the sexual act was consensual or rape. Specifically, it analyzes if there was consent given under misconception of fact. The court ultimately sides with the prosecution, finding the delay in filing the FIR reasonable and that rape was committed as described by the informant.
The convict petitioner Rakesh had served 14 years of life imprisonment and was granted parole for the first time. However, he was unable to furnish the required surety bonds due to poverty. The court noted the poor conditions of the petitioner. It directed legal and prison authorities to prepare a database of all convicts to better consider them for parole and reintegration. Considering the long imprisonment, the court granted the petitioner 40 days parole upon furnishing a personal bond and undertaking to return to prison after. It aimed to follow reformative punishment and uphold convicts' rights per the constitution.
1. The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir heard appeals against an order rejecting bail applications for appellants arrested in connection with a case under unlawful activities laws.
2. The Court found that the trial court misdirected itself by extending detention periods based on investigating officer applications instead of reports from the public prosecutor as required by law.
3. As the charge sheet was filed beyond the mandatory 90 day period, the appellants had an indefeasible right to default bail that the trial court failed to consider. The High Court allowed the appeals and set aside the trial court order, granting the appellants bail.
The appellant appealed against an order rejecting his application for temporary bail to attend the last rites of his deceased mother. The court heard the appeal and considered additional information provided in an affidavit. While the original reason for seeking temporary bail no longer applied due to time passed, the court found humanitarian grounds to grant temporary bail for the appellant to attend rituals and a condolence meeting for his mother scheduled on the anniversary of her death. The court ordered the appellant's release on temporary bail from August 13-21, 2021 subject to furnishing a bond and sureties, and reporting to police.
Delhi sessions court umar khalid handcuffs orderZahidManiyar
This document summarizes the court proceedings regarding applications to produce two accused persons, Umar Khalid and Khalid Saifi, in handcuffs. The court notes replies from jail superintendents, the DCP of Special Cell, and the DCP of the 3rd Battalion that suggest the applications lack merit as the prison rules do not mention handcuffing prisoners. As the accused are not convicted criminals or gangsters, the applications appear to have been filed without proper consideration. However, given new COVID protocols, the accused are no longer being produced in person in court, making the applications unnecessary at this stage. The court therefore dismisses the applications as not required.
This document is a court order from a case involving multiple accused persons. It summarizes proceedings from a hearing where the prosecution requested more time for further investigation into the case. The court allowed more time but imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 to be split among the accused, noting delays in the investigation. It also ordered the Secretary of Home Affairs to inquire about responsibility for the costs being imposed and deducting the amount from the responsible officer's salary. The case was adjourned to a future date for further proceedings.
Kerala hc order d rajagopal-v-ayyappan-anr-402210ZahidManiyar
This document summarizes two criminal revision petitions filed in the High Court of Kerala against judgments from lower courts. The lower courts had found police officers guilty of assaulting a complainant while he was in custody. The police officers argue on appeal that the lower courts erred in not requiring sanction from the state government before prosecuting public servants. The High Court examines the evidence and finds that the injuries occurred while the complainant was in police custody, supporting his allegation that police assaulted him at the police station lockup. Medical evidence also supports the complainant's version of events. The High Court dismisses the criminal revision petitions filed by the police officers.
This document provides a summary of a Supreme Court of India case regarding an appeal against convictions for offenses under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code. The key details are:
1) The appellant was convicted by the Sessions Court and High Court for raping a 19-year-old blind Scheduled Caste woman.
2) The Supreme Court affirmed that the offense of rape under Section 376(1) IPC was proven beyond reasonable doubt based on testimony and medical evidence.
3) However, it examined the appellant's argument that the ingredients of the offense under Section 3(2)(v
This document summarizes a court case appeal regarding the rejection of a bail application.
The appellant, Harshvardhan Yadav, has appealed the rejection of his bail by the lower court in a rape case filed against him by the informant, a police constable. The appellant argues the sexual act was consensual while the prosecution claims it was rape.
The court discusses past judgments on similar cases to determine if the sexual act was consensual or rape. Specifically, it analyzes if there was consent given under misconception of fact. The court ultimately sides with the prosecution, finding the delay in filing the FIR reasonable and that rape was committed as described by the informant.
The convict petitioner Rakesh had served 14 years of life imprisonment and was granted parole for the first time. However, he was unable to furnish the required surety bonds due to poverty. The court noted the poor conditions of the petitioner. It directed legal and prison authorities to prepare a database of all convicts to better consider them for parole and reintegration. Considering the long imprisonment, the court granted the petitioner 40 days parole upon furnishing a personal bond and undertaking to return to prison after. It aimed to follow reformative punishment and uphold convicts' rights per the constitution.
1. The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir heard appeals against an order rejecting bail applications for appellants arrested in connection with a case under unlawful activities laws.
2. The Court found that the trial court misdirected itself by extending detention periods based on investigating officer applications instead of reports from the public prosecutor as required by law.
3. As the charge sheet was filed beyond the mandatory 90 day period, the appellants had an indefeasible right to default bail that the trial court failed to consider. The High Court allowed the appeals and set aside the trial court order, granting the appellants bail.
The appellant appealed against an order rejecting his application for temporary bail to attend the last rites of his deceased mother. The court heard the appeal and considered additional information provided in an affidavit. While the original reason for seeking temporary bail no longer applied due to time passed, the court found humanitarian grounds to grant temporary bail for the appellant to attend rituals and a condolence meeting for his mother scheduled on the anniversary of her death. The court ordered the appellant's release on temporary bail from August 13-21, 2021 subject to furnishing a bond and sureties, and reporting to police.
Delhi sessions court umar khalid handcuffs orderZahidManiyar
This document summarizes the court proceedings regarding applications to produce two accused persons, Umar Khalid and Khalid Saifi, in handcuffs. The court notes replies from jail superintendents, the DCP of Special Cell, and the DCP of the 3rd Battalion that suggest the applications lack merit as the prison rules do not mention handcuffing prisoners. As the accused are not convicted criminals or gangsters, the applications appear to have been filed without proper consideration. However, given new COVID protocols, the accused are no longer being produced in person in court, making the applications unnecessary at this stage. The court therefore dismisses the applications as not required.
1. The appellant, Iqbal Ahmed Kabir Ahmed, who was the original accused No. 3, filed an application for bail which was rejected by the special judge. He has filed this appeal against the rejection.
2. The key evidence against the appellant includes the recovery of an oath from his house pursuant to disclosure by an co-accused, and pointing out an electric switchboard in his house where an IED was allegedly soldered. Statements of witnesses also indicate the appellant participated in meetings where actions regarding perceived threats to Islam were discussed.
3. The prosecution argues the material is sufficient to show a prima facie case against the appellant and reasonable grounds exist to believe the accusations, thereby invoking the
1) The applicant Golu @ Tasneem @ Taslim filed a bail application in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh seeking bail in connection with a crime registered under various sections of IPC and POCSO Act.
2) It was argued for the applicant that he is the first offender and has been in custody since August 23, 2021. His custodial interrogation is no longer required.
3) The prosecution opposed the bail plea submitting that various identity cards of different names were recovered from the applicant. The court examined the facts of the case and granted bail to the applicant with various conditions.
This document provides details of 3 bail applications filed by individuals accused in a case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleging offenses related to espionage against scientists at ISRO in 1994. The applications were filed by the 11th accused, the 1st and 2nd accused, and the 7th accused. The court heard arguments from lawyers representing the accused. The document discusses the background of the espionage case against ISRO scientists in 1994 and its investigation and closure. It also discusses the report submitted in 2021 by a committee headed by a former Supreme Court judge regarding the false implication of individuals in the case.
Mp hc wp 9799 2021_final_order_28-jul-2021ZahidManiyar
1. The petitioner challenged his detention order under the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980.
2. The petitioner was running a business and an FIR was registered against him for illegally stocking and selling oxygen cylinders without a license. A raid found 571 jumbo and 90 small oxygen cylinders in his warehouse.
3. The petitioner argued that the detaining authority failed to consider that he was already in custody at the time the detention order was passed and his potential release on bail, which is required. The court found no mention of the petitioner's custody in the detention order.
1. The document summarizes a court case involving a petition filed by Mohd. Faiyyaz Mansuri challenging his detention under the National Security Act by the District Magistrate of Lakhimpur Kheri.
2. The grounds for detention included posting provocative content on Facebook aimed at provoking Hindu sentiments and disturbing public order. An FIR was registered and the petitioner was arrested.
3. The detention order was approved, confirmed, and extended on multiple occasions by various authorities. The petitioner argued the charges in the FIR did not warrant detention under the National Security Act.
This document is a court ruling from the High Court of Madhya Pradesh regarding a public interest litigation petition seeking action against two police constables who allegedly beat an auto rickshaw driver for not wearing a mask properly. The court notes previous orders directing police not to use corporal punishment for violations of COVID protocols. While not commenting on the merits of the case, the court directs the Superintendent of Police of Indore to take appropriate action on complaints of police excesses and beatings, including against the two respondents, and ensure disciplinary proceedings are concluded. The court reaffirms its prior order that citizens should not face beatings for protocol violations, and police should instead counsel people to follow protocols.
The High Court of Kerala recalled three previous orders granting petitions to quash criminal cases relating to offenses of rape and under the POCSO Act. In recalling the orders, the Court noted it had failed to consider binding Supreme Court precedents holding that cases involving offenses like rape cannot be quashed solely due to settlements between the parties. While the petitioners argued the Court could not recall signed orders, the Court held this was not a review but rather pointing out a legal omission. The cases will be reheard in detail after the summer vacation.
The petitioner seeks to quash criminal proceedings against him for offenses under Sections 172, 173 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(F), 3(1)(g) of SC/ST (POA) Act. The allegations are that the petitioner, who owns 5 acres 4 guntas of land, wrongfully claimed ownership of 3 acres 3 guntas of the second respondent's neighboring land and obtained revenue records in his name. However, the court finds that the dispute appears to be civil in nature regarding ownership of land between two parties. Further, the ingredients to prove offenses under Sections 3(1)(f) and 3(1)(g) of SC/ST Act are not made out based on the facts.
This document is a court order summarizing a bail application case. It discusses the facts of the case, including statements made by the prosecutrix and informant, and contradictory details in the statements. It notes that the prosecutrix and applicant had a prior consensual relationship and material contradictions exist in her statements. While the prosecution opposed bail, the court ultimately granted bail to the applicant, noting he has no prior criminal record and has been jailed since September 2020. Bail was granted with conditions including not contacting the prosecutrix, cooperating with trial, and not engaging in further criminal acts.
The Supreme Court of India granted leave in an appeal regarding the denial of anticipatory bail to an appellant. The court analyzed Section 170 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and previous court judgments on the interpretation of this section. The court agreed with the view that Section 170 does not impose an obligation on investigatory officers to arrest every accused when filing a chargesheet. The word "custody" in Section 170 refers to presenting the accused in court, not requiring police or judicial custody. If the accused has cooperated throughout the investigation and there is no reason to believe they will abscond, arrest is not necessary. Insisting on arrest as a prerequisite for accepting a chargesheet violates the intent of Section 170 and personal liberty. In this case
The Supreme Court of India heard an appeal by the National Investigation Agency against a High Court order granting bail to Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, who was accused in a terrorism funding case. The trial court had rejected bail citing serious allegations against Watali, including acting as a conduit for funds to terrorists and separatists in Jammu and Kashmir. However, the High Court granted bail subject to conditions. In its judgment, the Supreme Court analyzed the evidence and allegations in detail and concluded that the offenses against Watali were prima facie established. It also noted that he received adequate medical care in jail. The Court allowed the appeal and canceled the bail granted by the High Court.
The Supreme Court of India heard a suo moto writ petition regarding problems faced by migrant workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Court noted submissions from petitioners regarding inadequate distribution of dry rations, cooked food and cash transfers to migrant workers. States provided details of steps taken to help migrant workers, including transportation, food and registration processes.
The Court emphasized the need to complete registration of unorganized workers under new social security laws to help workers access welfare schemes. It directed the central government to file an affidavit with details on developing a national database for registration of all unorganized workers across states. The Court also stressed the need to effectively monitor welfare schemes to ensure benefits reach beneficiaries.
The document is a court order regarding an application for bail by Preet Singh, who has been accused of offenses under the IPC and Epidemic Diseases Act related to organizing a gathering without permission. The investigating officer opposed bail, citing video evidence of Singh's presence and the risk of further offenses. However, the court denied bail, noting that while the offenses are bailable, Singh's case differs from a previously bailed accused who was not seen inciting crowds in video clips as Singh was. The court found that further investigation was needed and denied bail at this stage.
1. This document summarizes a court case involving a writ petition filed by two lesbian petitioners (S. Sushma and U. Seema Agarval) seeking police protection from their parents.
2. The petitioners had fled from Madurai to Chennai to escape pressure and opposition from their parents regarding their lesbian relationship. Their parents had filed missing person reports with the police.
3. The court held in-camera hearings and counseling sessions with the petitioners and their parents to better understand the situation. It was found that the petitioners were clear about their relationship, while the parents were concerned about societal stigma and their daughters' safety.
The court heard a bail application where the prosecution was not able to present full facts due to lack of instructions from police. The court directed police to explain. Police confirmed instructions now available and enquiry ordered into failure to provide earlier. The court discussed prior case law on timely bail hearings and directed the DGP to create a transparent procedure for police to provide timely instructions to prosecutors for bail hearings across UP within 8 weeks.
The Supreme Court of India allowed the appeals of Md. Misher Ali against an order declaring him a foreigner. [The Court summarized that] the Foreigner's Tribunal and High Court orders were passed in violation of principles of natural justice as notice was not served at Ali's permanent residence, which was known to authorities. The Court set aside the orders and remanded the case back to the Foreigner's Tribunal to allow Ali an opportunity to respond consistent with principles of natural justice.
The petitioner, Maaysha Singh, filed a writ petition seeking bail for her mother, Sudha Bharadwaj, who was imprisoned. While the petitioner no longer pressed the request for bail on medical grounds, the court noted that prisoners have a right to their medical records under the constitution. The court ordered the prison authorities to provide all of Bharadwaj's medical records and test results upon request. The court also agreed that Bharadwaj should be allowed to make phone calls to approved family members after medical visits. The writ petition was then disposed of with these orders regarding access to medical information.
1) The court heard from petitioner 1, who submitted that she converted to Islam of her own free will and married petitioner 2 without force. She stated she faces threats to her life from respondents 6 and 7 due to her marriage.
2) Petitioner 1 provided documents showing she is of legal age to marry. She asked the court to protect her life and that of her husband based on constitutional guarantees.
3) The court directed respondents 1-5, including police, to ensure the petitioners' safety and are not harassed by respondents 6 and 7, and to allow them to live married without interference.
1) The Supreme Court of India heard a petition from the State of Uttar Pradesh challenging an order from the Allahabad High Court regarding management of COVID-19.
2) The Supreme Court acknowledged the efforts of High Courts but noted some directions may not be implementable. It cited examples where the High Court directed ambulances and facilities that would be impossible to provide across the entire state.
3) While appreciating the High Court's intentions, the Supreme Court held some directions were incapable of being implemented and should be treated as observations rather than binding orders. The State was not exempted from making efforts to provide facilities.
Nexus of rtd justice s.b. sinha and praveen kumar idas to cgdaOm Prakash Poddar
Nexus of Rtd Justice S.B. Sinha & Praveen Kumar (IDAS) to kill me and my oxygen dependent mother in the defense area of Palam New Delhi and to usurp our property in Bihar has been apprised to Controller General Defense Accounts, Government of India to take departmental action against Praveen Kumar (IDAS)
20201018 andheri mm court 20 tablighis acquitted(1)sabrangsabrang
This document summarizes a court case in Mumbai, India involving 10 individuals from Indonesia who were charged with violating lockdown orders issued due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The prosecution presented evidence from two witnesses, police officers who discovered the individuals at a local mosque on April 5, 2020, allegedly in violation of restrictions. The defense disputed the evidence and cited other court rulings that discharged defendants in similar cases. The judge considered the arguments from both sides to determine if the prosecution had sufficiently proven their case.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It summarizes the hearing, including statements made by counsel for the petitioner and respondent. The Court notes that an FIR was finally registered in the case on January 15, 2023, though the information forming the basis for the FIR was provided in July 2021. The respondent acknowledges the late registration and states punitive action is being taken. The Court orders the respondent to submit additional affidavits within two weeks providing more details on the police investigation and the apprehension of suspects in a related case from June 2021. The matter is scheduled for further consideration on March 3, 2023.
1. The appellant, Iqbal Ahmed Kabir Ahmed, who was the original accused No. 3, filed an application for bail which was rejected by the special judge. He has filed this appeal against the rejection.
2. The key evidence against the appellant includes the recovery of an oath from his house pursuant to disclosure by an co-accused, and pointing out an electric switchboard in his house where an IED was allegedly soldered. Statements of witnesses also indicate the appellant participated in meetings where actions regarding perceived threats to Islam were discussed.
3. The prosecution argues the material is sufficient to show a prima facie case against the appellant and reasonable grounds exist to believe the accusations, thereby invoking the
1) The applicant Golu @ Tasneem @ Taslim filed a bail application in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh seeking bail in connection with a crime registered under various sections of IPC and POCSO Act.
2) It was argued for the applicant that he is the first offender and has been in custody since August 23, 2021. His custodial interrogation is no longer required.
3) The prosecution opposed the bail plea submitting that various identity cards of different names were recovered from the applicant. The court examined the facts of the case and granted bail to the applicant with various conditions.
This document provides details of 3 bail applications filed by individuals accused in a case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleging offenses related to espionage against scientists at ISRO in 1994. The applications were filed by the 11th accused, the 1st and 2nd accused, and the 7th accused. The court heard arguments from lawyers representing the accused. The document discusses the background of the espionage case against ISRO scientists in 1994 and its investigation and closure. It also discusses the report submitted in 2021 by a committee headed by a former Supreme Court judge regarding the false implication of individuals in the case.
Mp hc wp 9799 2021_final_order_28-jul-2021ZahidManiyar
1. The petitioner challenged his detention order under the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980.
2. The petitioner was running a business and an FIR was registered against him for illegally stocking and selling oxygen cylinders without a license. A raid found 571 jumbo and 90 small oxygen cylinders in his warehouse.
3. The petitioner argued that the detaining authority failed to consider that he was already in custody at the time the detention order was passed and his potential release on bail, which is required. The court found no mention of the petitioner's custody in the detention order.
1. The document summarizes a court case involving a petition filed by Mohd. Faiyyaz Mansuri challenging his detention under the National Security Act by the District Magistrate of Lakhimpur Kheri.
2. The grounds for detention included posting provocative content on Facebook aimed at provoking Hindu sentiments and disturbing public order. An FIR was registered and the petitioner was arrested.
3. The detention order was approved, confirmed, and extended on multiple occasions by various authorities. The petitioner argued the charges in the FIR did not warrant detention under the National Security Act.
This document is a court ruling from the High Court of Madhya Pradesh regarding a public interest litigation petition seeking action against two police constables who allegedly beat an auto rickshaw driver for not wearing a mask properly. The court notes previous orders directing police not to use corporal punishment for violations of COVID protocols. While not commenting on the merits of the case, the court directs the Superintendent of Police of Indore to take appropriate action on complaints of police excesses and beatings, including against the two respondents, and ensure disciplinary proceedings are concluded. The court reaffirms its prior order that citizens should not face beatings for protocol violations, and police should instead counsel people to follow protocols.
The High Court of Kerala recalled three previous orders granting petitions to quash criminal cases relating to offenses of rape and under the POCSO Act. In recalling the orders, the Court noted it had failed to consider binding Supreme Court precedents holding that cases involving offenses like rape cannot be quashed solely due to settlements between the parties. While the petitioners argued the Court could not recall signed orders, the Court held this was not a review but rather pointing out a legal omission. The cases will be reheard in detail after the summer vacation.
The petitioner seeks to quash criminal proceedings against him for offenses under Sections 172, 173 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(F), 3(1)(g) of SC/ST (POA) Act. The allegations are that the petitioner, who owns 5 acres 4 guntas of land, wrongfully claimed ownership of 3 acres 3 guntas of the second respondent's neighboring land and obtained revenue records in his name. However, the court finds that the dispute appears to be civil in nature regarding ownership of land between two parties. Further, the ingredients to prove offenses under Sections 3(1)(f) and 3(1)(g) of SC/ST Act are not made out based on the facts.
This document is a court order summarizing a bail application case. It discusses the facts of the case, including statements made by the prosecutrix and informant, and contradictory details in the statements. It notes that the prosecutrix and applicant had a prior consensual relationship and material contradictions exist in her statements. While the prosecution opposed bail, the court ultimately granted bail to the applicant, noting he has no prior criminal record and has been jailed since September 2020. Bail was granted with conditions including not contacting the prosecutrix, cooperating with trial, and not engaging in further criminal acts.
The Supreme Court of India granted leave in an appeal regarding the denial of anticipatory bail to an appellant. The court analyzed Section 170 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and previous court judgments on the interpretation of this section. The court agreed with the view that Section 170 does not impose an obligation on investigatory officers to arrest every accused when filing a chargesheet. The word "custody" in Section 170 refers to presenting the accused in court, not requiring police or judicial custody. If the accused has cooperated throughout the investigation and there is no reason to believe they will abscond, arrest is not necessary. Insisting on arrest as a prerequisite for accepting a chargesheet violates the intent of Section 170 and personal liberty. In this case
The Supreme Court of India heard an appeal by the National Investigation Agency against a High Court order granting bail to Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, who was accused in a terrorism funding case. The trial court had rejected bail citing serious allegations against Watali, including acting as a conduit for funds to terrorists and separatists in Jammu and Kashmir. However, the High Court granted bail subject to conditions. In its judgment, the Supreme Court analyzed the evidence and allegations in detail and concluded that the offenses against Watali were prima facie established. It also noted that he received adequate medical care in jail. The Court allowed the appeal and canceled the bail granted by the High Court.
The Supreme Court of India heard a suo moto writ petition regarding problems faced by migrant workers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Court noted submissions from petitioners regarding inadequate distribution of dry rations, cooked food and cash transfers to migrant workers. States provided details of steps taken to help migrant workers, including transportation, food and registration processes.
The Court emphasized the need to complete registration of unorganized workers under new social security laws to help workers access welfare schemes. It directed the central government to file an affidavit with details on developing a national database for registration of all unorganized workers across states. The Court also stressed the need to effectively monitor welfare schemes to ensure benefits reach beneficiaries.
The document is a court order regarding an application for bail by Preet Singh, who has been accused of offenses under the IPC and Epidemic Diseases Act related to organizing a gathering without permission. The investigating officer opposed bail, citing video evidence of Singh's presence and the risk of further offenses. However, the court denied bail, noting that while the offenses are bailable, Singh's case differs from a previously bailed accused who was not seen inciting crowds in video clips as Singh was. The court found that further investigation was needed and denied bail at this stage.
1. This document summarizes a court case involving a writ petition filed by two lesbian petitioners (S. Sushma and U. Seema Agarval) seeking police protection from their parents.
2. The petitioners had fled from Madurai to Chennai to escape pressure and opposition from their parents regarding their lesbian relationship. Their parents had filed missing person reports with the police.
3. The court held in-camera hearings and counseling sessions with the petitioners and their parents to better understand the situation. It was found that the petitioners were clear about their relationship, while the parents were concerned about societal stigma and their daughters' safety.
The court heard a bail application where the prosecution was not able to present full facts due to lack of instructions from police. The court directed police to explain. Police confirmed instructions now available and enquiry ordered into failure to provide earlier. The court discussed prior case law on timely bail hearings and directed the DGP to create a transparent procedure for police to provide timely instructions to prosecutors for bail hearings across UP within 8 weeks.
The Supreme Court of India allowed the appeals of Md. Misher Ali against an order declaring him a foreigner. [The Court summarized that] the Foreigner's Tribunal and High Court orders were passed in violation of principles of natural justice as notice was not served at Ali's permanent residence, which was known to authorities. The Court set aside the orders and remanded the case back to the Foreigner's Tribunal to allow Ali an opportunity to respond consistent with principles of natural justice.
The petitioner, Maaysha Singh, filed a writ petition seeking bail for her mother, Sudha Bharadwaj, who was imprisoned. While the petitioner no longer pressed the request for bail on medical grounds, the court noted that prisoners have a right to their medical records under the constitution. The court ordered the prison authorities to provide all of Bharadwaj's medical records and test results upon request. The court also agreed that Bharadwaj should be allowed to make phone calls to approved family members after medical visits. The writ petition was then disposed of with these orders regarding access to medical information.
1) The court heard from petitioner 1, who submitted that she converted to Islam of her own free will and married petitioner 2 without force. She stated she faces threats to her life from respondents 6 and 7 due to her marriage.
2) Petitioner 1 provided documents showing she is of legal age to marry. She asked the court to protect her life and that of her husband based on constitutional guarantees.
3) The court directed respondents 1-5, including police, to ensure the petitioners' safety and are not harassed by respondents 6 and 7, and to allow them to live married without interference.
1) The Supreme Court of India heard a petition from the State of Uttar Pradesh challenging an order from the Allahabad High Court regarding management of COVID-19.
2) The Supreme Court acknowledged the efforts of High Courts but noted some directions may not be implementable. It cited examples where the High Court directed ambulances and facilities that would be impossible to provide across the entire state.
3) While appreciating the High Court's intentions, the Supreme Court held some directions were incapable of being implemented and should be treated as observations rather than binding orders. The State was not exempted from making efforts to provide facilities.
Nexus of rtd justice s.b. sinha and praveen kumar idas to cgdaOm Prakash Poddar
Nexus of Rtd Justice S.B. Sinha & Praveen Kumar (IDAS) to kill me and my oxygen dependent mother in the defense area of Palam New Delhi and to usurp our property in Bihar has been apprised to Controller General Defense Accounts, Government of India to take departmental action against Praveen Kumar (IDAS)
20201018 andheri mm court 20 tablighis acquitted(1)sabrangsabrang
This document summarizes a court case in Mumbai, India involving 10 individuals from Indonesia who were charged with violating lockdown orders issued due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The prosecution presented evidence from two witnesses, police officers who discovered the individuals at a local mosque on April 5, 2020, allegedly in violation of restrictions. The defense disputed the evidence and cited other court rulings that discharged defendants in similar cases. The judge considered the arguments from both sides to determine if the prosecution had sufficiently proven their case.
This document is the record of proceedings from the Supreme Court of India regarding a writ petition. It summarizes the hearing, including statements made by counsel for the petitioner and respondent. The Court notes that an FIR was finally registered in the case on January 15, 2023, though the information forming the basis for the FIR was provided in July 2021. The respondent acknowledges the late registration and states punitive action is being taken. The Court orders the respondent to submit additional affidavits within two weeks providing more details on the police investigation and the apprehension of suspects in a related case from June 2021. The matter is scheduled for further consideration on March 3, 2023.
Skeleton argument for the Appellant Julian Assange 110630swedenversusassange
The document outlines the chronology of events involving Julian Assange and allegations of sexual misconduct in Sweden between August and November 2010. It then presents 4 submissions arguing why the European Arrest Warrant issued for Assange's extradition to Sweden is invalid and his extradition should not be permitted. The key points made are that Swedish investigators violated procedures, the conduct alleged does not constitute extraditable offenses, and political motivations undermine the integrity of the proceedings.
This document describes legal proceedings related to the bail application and writ petitions filed on behalf of Dr. P.V. Varavara Rao, an 81-year old undertrial prisoner accused of terrorism offenses. Rao has filed for bail and writ petitions on medical grounds citing his advanced age and health conditions. The document outlines the legal history of Rao's case and arrest, provides details of his medical conditions and treatment in prison, and describes the various bail applications and writ petitions filed seeking his release from custody on humanitarian grounds.
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of India judgment regarding a review petition filed by an accused, referred to as 'Accused X', challenging his conviction and death sentence. The court heard arguments on two issues - whether the trial court violated the accused's right to a pre-sentencing hearing by passing conviction and sentence orders on the same day, and whether the accused's alleged mental illness warranted commuting his death sentence to life imprisonment. The court examined relevant laws and precedents on these issues to determine whether the accused's review petition had any merit.
June 26 madras hc tuticorin custodial deathZahidManiyar
This document summarizes the orders from a court hearing regarding the deaths of Jeyaraj and Bennicks in police custody in Sathankulam, Tamil Nadu. The court directed the judicial magistrate to conduct further inquiries into the matter, including examining witnesses in Sathankulam, recording statements from family members, inspecting the police station, collecting CCTV footage and medical records. The court also ordered an inquiry into injuries sustained by another inmate and appreciation of the new SOP issued for police handling of lockdown violators. The magistrate was given wide powers and support to thoroughly investigate the circumstances of the deaths.
This document is a court order from the High Court of Kerala regarding a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner was granted bail by the Sessions Court but was ordered to deposit Rs. 25,000 towards a Corona Relief Fund. The High Court quashes this condition, finding that courts cannot direct accused persons to make cash deposits for bail. However, the petitioner must still comply with all other bail conditions. Due to Covid-19 restrictions, the Court also directs police to allow the petitioner and sureties to travel to execute the bail bond.
Rajivgandhi v. The State- Madras hc SCC.pdfsabrangsabrang
1) The appellant was convicted by the trial court for offenses under the POCSO Act and Section 363 IPC for kidnapping and sexually assaulting a 16-year-old girl.
2) The High Court upheld the conviction under the POCSO Act but acquitted the appellant of the kidnapping charge under Section 363 IPC, finding that the victim had gone voluntarily with the appellant.
3) However, the Court confirmed the conviction under the POCSO Act, noting that the victim's testimony clearly described penetrative sexual assault and the medical evidence supported this, while the appellant failed to dislodge the presumption of guilt under the Act.
The court heard two bail applications together regarding the same FIR for offenses of murder and rioting. One eyewitness claimed to witness incidents in two different locations over 500 meters apart on the same day. The court directed the state to verify this, and the state reported the locations were actually 350 meters apart. While the veracity of allegations will be determined at trial, the court granted bail to the petitioners since one had been in custody for over a year and trial would take substantial time. Bail was granted on furnishing personal bonds of Rs. 20,000 with one surety each of the same amount.
The Supreme Court of India heard a mention by the Attorney General regarding a recent judgment by the Bombay High Court that acquitted an accused under Section 8 of the POCSO Act. The Attorney General argued that the Bombay High Court judgment would set a dangerous precedent by acquitting the accused on the grounds that there was no "skin to skin" contact, and thus no sexual intent. The Supreme Court permitted the Attorney General to file an appropriate petition against the Bombay High Court judgment. It also stayed the acquittal under Section 8 of the POCSO Act and issued notices to the accused and the State of Maharashtra.
1) The court dismissed a criminal revision application filed by Kangana Ranaut challenging a lower court order issuing a process in a criminal defamation complaint filed against her.
2) The lower court properly examined the complainant under Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code and directed an investigation under Section 202, satisfying the legal requirements.
3) The court found no errors in the lower court's order regarding its correctness or legality, or any irregularities in the lower court proceedings. The criminal revision application was dismissed.
Matthew Professional CV experienced Government LiaisonMattGardner52
As an experienced Government Liaison, I have demonstrated expertise in Corporate Governance. My skill set includes senior-level management in Contract Management, Legal Support, and Diplomatic Relations. I have also gained proficiency as a Corporate Liaison, utilizing my strong background in accounting, finance, and legal, with a Bachelor's degree (B.A.) from California State University. My Administrative Skills further strengthen my ability to contribute to the growth and success of any organization.
This document briefly explains the June compliance calendar 2024 with income tax returns, PF, ESI, and important due dates, forms to be filled out, periods, and who should file them?.
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...lawyersonia
The legal profession, which has historically been male-dominated, has experienced a significant increase in the number of women entering the field over the past few decades. Despite this progress, women lawyers continue to encounter various challenges as they strive for top positions.
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने यह भी माना था कि मजिस्ट्रेट का यह कर्तव्य है कि वह सुनिश्चित करे कि अधिकारी पीएमएलए के तहत निर्धारित प्रक्रिया के साथ-साथ संवैधानिक सुरक्षा उपायों का भी उचित रूप से पालन करें।
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxMasoudZamani13
Excited to share insights from my recent presentation on genocide! 💡 In light of ongoing debates, it's crucial to delve into the nuances of this grave crime.
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentationseri bangash
"Lifting the Corporate Veil" is a legal concept that refers to the judicial act of disregarding the separate legal personality of a corporation or limited liability company (LLC). Normally, a corporation is considered a legal entity separate from its shareholders or members, meaning that the personal assets of shareholders or members are protected from the liabilities of the corporation. However, there are certain situations where courts may decide to "pierce" or "lift" the corporate veil, holding shareholders or members personally liable for the debts or actions of the corporation.
Here are some common scenarios in which courts might lift the corporate veil:
Fraud or Illegality: If shareholders or members use the corporate structure to perpetrate fraud, evade legal obligations, or engage in illegal activities, courts may disregard the corporate entity and hold those individuals personally liable.
Undercapitalization: If a corporation is formed with insufficient capital to conduct its intended business and meet its foreseeable liabilities, and this lack of capitalization results in harm to creditors or other parties, courts may lift the corporate veil to hold shareholders or members liable.
Failure to Observe Corporate Formalities: Corporations and LLCs are required to observe certain formalities, such as holding regular meetings, maintaining separate financial records, and avoiding commingling of personal and corporate assets. If these formalities are not observed and the corporate structure is used as a mere façade, courts may disregard the corporate entity.
Alter Ego: If there is such a unity of interest and ownership between the corporation and its shareholders or members that the separate personalities of the corporation and the individuals no longer exist, courts may treat the corporation as the alter ego of its owners and hold them personally liable.
Group Enterprises: In some cases, where multiple corporations are closely related or form part of a single economic unit, courts may pierce the corporate veil to achieve equity, particularly if one corporation's actions harm creditors or other stakeholders and the corporate structure is being used to shield culpable parties from liability.
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersHarpreetSaini48
Discover how Mississauga criminal defence lawyers defend clients facing weapon offence charges with expert legal guidance and courtroom representation.
To know more visit: https://www.saini-law.com/
Sangyun Lee, 'Why Korea's Merger Control Occasionally Fails: A Public Choice ...Sangyun Lee
Presentation slides for a session held on June 4, 2024, at Kyoto University. This presentation is based on the presenter’s recent paper, coauthored with Hwang Lee, Professor, Korea University, with the same title, published in the Journal of Business Administration & Law, Volume 34, No. 2 (April 2024). The paper, written in Korean, is available at <https://shorturl.at/GCWcI>.
Receivership and liquidation Accounts
Being a Paper Presented at Business Recovery and Insolvency Practitioners Association of Nigeria (BRIPAN) on Friday, August 18, 2023.
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdfveteranlegal
https://veteranlegal.in/defense-lawyer-in-india/ | Criminal defense Lawyer in India has always been a vital aspect of the country's legal system. As defenders of justice, criminal Defense Lawyer play a critical role in ensuring that individuals accused of crimes receive a fair trial and that their constitutional rights are protected. As India evolves socially, economically, and technologically, the role and future of criminal Defense Lawyer are also undergoing significant changes. This comprehensive blog explores the current landscape, challenges, technological advancements, and prospects for criminal Defense Lawyer in India.
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdf
Magistrate order
1. 1 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
Presented on : 28/09/2021.
Registered on : 28/09/2021.
Decided on : 05/10/2021.
Duration : 7 D 0 M 0 Y
Exh.
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
28
th
COURT, ESPLANADE, MUMBAI.
(Presided over by Yashshree Marulkar)
C.C.No.2800650/PW/2021
(C.R.No.1181/2021)
(CNR No.MHMM110061102021)
J U D G M E N T
(u/Sec. 355 of Cr.P.C.)
1) The serial No. of the case : 2800650/PW/2021.
2) The date of the Commission of
offence
: Dated 18/09/2021.
3) The name of the Complainant
(if any)
: State of Maharashtra,
Through P.S.O. of P.S.
L.T.Marg, Mumbai.
4) Name of the Accused, his parentage
and residence
: Rajkumar Narayan Tandel,
Age : 56 years,
R/o. 46 A, Macchimar Nagar
No.2, Captain Prakash
Pethemarg, Colaba,
Mumbai.
5) The offence complained of or
proved
: Under Sections 354, 354(A),
354(D) of the Indian Penal
Code.
6) The plea of the accused and their
examination
: Accused Pleaded not guilty.
7) The Final Order : Accused is convicted.
2. 2 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
8) The date of such order : Date: 05/10/2021.
Appearance : Ld. A.P.P. For State
Advocate Giri for the accused
1. Accused sitting in a dock is facing trial for the offences alleged
to have been committed punishable under Sections 354, 354(A)(iv), 354(D)
of the Indian Penal Code (for the sake of brevity hereinafter referred to as the
“IPC” in short).
2. In nutshell the case of the prosecution is as under:
The informant was working at N.N. Jain Associates at Aman
Chambers, Churni Road, Mumbai. The incident took place on 18/09/2021 at
about 6.45 p.m. in S.K. Patil Garden. The informant after leaving the office
in the evening, had gone to S.K. Patil Garden at around 5.45 p.m. At that
time, she was sitting in the said garden and watching an online C. A. lecture
on her mobile. Soon after the informant noticed that, the accused was
moving around her as though stalking her. Thus, the informant got up and
sat on a bench in another part of the garden to get away from the accused.
3. However, the accused followed her again. As there was nobody
around the garden, suddenly the accused unzipped his trouser and started
walking towards the informant, exposing his genitals. The informant
frightened by the accused, started running towards the exit gate of the
garden while the accused still kept following her in the same position.
4. Then the informant spotted two people sitting in the garden and
asked for their help. The said persons caught and restrained the accused.
3. 3 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
Meanwhile, the informant called the police for help. After that, the security
guard of S.K. Patil garden came to the spot of the incident. Shortly
afterwards, a police vehicle arrived at the spot and took the accused into
custody and brought him to the police station with the informant. Thereafter,
the informant lodged Report against the accused.
5. On the basis of the Report of the informant, crime against the
accused was registered vide C.R. No.1181/2021 vide Sections 354, 354(A),
354(D) of the IPC in L.T.Marg Police Station. Initially PSI Kadam recorded
the Report. Then the investigation was handed over to API Shelar. He
investigated the crime. He visited the spot of incident, and recorded
statement of two eye witnesses. Thereafter, the investigation was handed
over to PSI Jadhav. She recorded the statement of other witnesses. After
completion of the investigation, she filed the chargesheet against the accused
in the Court.
6. I framed the charge on 04/10/2021 at Exh.2 against the
accused under Sections 354, 354(A)(iv), 354(D) of the IPC. The contents of
the charge read over and explained to the accused in his vernacular. The
accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The defence of the accused and
as per his statement recorded vide Section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure on 04/10/2021 at Exh.14, is of the total denial and false
implication.
7. On the basis of the case of the prosecution and evidence led,
following points arose for my determination. I have given my findings on
those points for reasons to follow are as under:
Sr.
No
Points for consideration Findings
1 Whether the prosecution proves that,
the accused used criminal force to the
… Yes.
4. 4 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
informant, intending to outrage her
modesty by such force ?
2 Whether the prosecution proves that the
accused, intending to outrage modesty
of the informant, unzipped his trouser
and exposed his genitals to the
informant ?
… Yes.
3 Whether the prosecution proves that the
accused, committed the offence of
stalking by following the informant ?
… Yes.
4 What order? .. As per final order.
: R E A S O N S :
8. In order to establish charge against the accused, the prosecution
has examined in all five witnesses on 04/10/2021 i.e. the informant at
Exhibit at 5, Ancito (P.W. No. 2) at Exhibit 8, PSI Kadam (P.W. No.3) at
Exhibit 9, I.O. PSI Jadhav (P.W. No. 4) at Exhibit 10 and Tushar (P.W. No.5)
at Exhibit 13. The prosecution has relied on the documentary evidence such
as Report at Exhibit 6, Spot panchanama at Exhibit 11, Statement of the
informant vide Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at Exhibit 7
and Certified copy of Judgment dtd. 21/12/20218 in Pocso Special Case No.
450/2015 at Exhibit 12. Heard the Ld. APP and the Counsel for the accused
at length on 05/10/2021.
AS TO POINT NO. 1 To 3 :
9. It has come in evidence of the informant that, the incident took
place on 18/09/2021 at about 6.45 p.m. in S.K. Patil Garden. She after
leaving the office in the evening had gone to S.K. Patil Garden at around
5.45 p.m. At that time, she was sitting in the said garden and watching an
5. 5 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
online C. A. lecture on her mobile. Soon after she noticed that the accused
was moving around her as though stalking her. Thus, she got up and sat on a
bench in another part of the garden to get away from the accused.
10. However, the accused followed her again. As there was nobody
around the garden, suddenly the accused unzipped his trouser and started
walking towards the informant, exposing his genitals. The informant
frightened by the accused, started running towards the exit gate of the
garden while the accused still kept following her in the same position.
11. It has further come in her evidence that, then she spotted two
people sitting in the garden and asked for their help. The said persons caught
and restrained the accused. Meanwhile, the informant called the police for
help. After that, the security guard of S.K. Patil garden came to the spot of
the incident. Shortly afterwards, a police vehicle arrived at the spot and took
the accused into custody and brought him to the police station with the
informant. Thereafter, the informant lodged Report (Exh.6) against the
accused. She identified the accused in the Court. She was crossexamined at
length by the defence.
12. It has come in the evidence of Ancito (P.W. No.2) and Tushar
(P.W.No.5) that, on 18/09/2021 at about 6.45 p.m. in the evening, they
were present in S.K. Patil garden. At that time the girl came running towards
them followed by the accused, who was flashing her. She raised alarm for
the aid. After that the accused fixed the zip of his trouser and tried to flee.
However, they caught him. After that the girl called the police for help. The
security guard of S.K. Patil garden came to the spot of the incident. Shortly
afterwards, a police vehicle arrived at the spot and took the accused into
custody and brought him to the police station with the informant. They also
went to the police station. After reaching the police station, they came to
7. 7 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
16. I think it appropriate to refer to the ingredients of the sections
with which the accused are charged.
Section 354 :– The points requiring proof are –
1. A women was assaulted or criminal force was used
to her
2. The assault or use of criminal force was by the
accused
3. The accused intended to outrage her modesty or knew
that her modesty was likely to be outraged.
Section 354 (A) - According to section 354A of Indian penal code,
1. physical contact and advances involving unwelcome
and explicit sexual overtures; or
2. a demand or request for sexual favours; or
3. showing pornography against the will of a woman; or
4. making sexually coloured remarks, shall be guilty of
the offence of sexual harassment.
Section 354 (D) (1) Any man who—
1. follows a woman and contacts, or attempts to contact
such woman to foster personal interaction
repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest
by such woman; or
2. monitors the use by a woman of the internet, email or
any other form of electronic communication,
commits the offence of stalking
17. Law regarding appreciation of evidence in sexual offence is now
set at rest by series of the decision by the Apex Court of the land. It is now
8. 8 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
well settled that conviction in sexual offences can safely be recorded
provided evidence of the victim of sexual offence does not suffer from any
basic infirmity and probability factor does not render it unworthy of
credence. With development of the law regarding sexual offences, it is now
crystal clear that a woman who is victim of sexual assault is not an
accomplice to the crime. Her evidence is similar to the evidence of an injured
informant or witness. Corroboration to her testimony is not a rule, but it is
only by way of abandon caution that the Court may look for some
corroboration so as to satisfy its conscious. At this juncture, it is relevant to
quote the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of State of
Maharashtra Vs. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain [1990 SCC 5501],
wherein it is held thus:
“A prosecutrix of a sexoffence cannot be put on part with an
accomplice. She is in fact a victim of the crime. The Evidence Act
nowhere says that her evidence cannot be accepted unless it is
corroborated in material particulars. She is undoubtedly a
competent witness under Section 118 of The Indian Evidence Act
and her evidence must receive the same weight as is attached to
an injured in cases of physical violence. The same degree of care
and caution must attach in the evaluation of her evidence as in the
case of an injured informant or witness and no more. What is
necessary is that the Court must be alive to and conscious of the
fact that, it is dealing with the evidence of a person who is
interested in the outcome of the charge levelled by her. If the
Court keeps this in mind and feels satisfied that it can act on the
evidence of the prosecutrix, there is no rule of law or practice
incorporated in the Evidence Act similar to illustration (b) to
Section 114 which requires it to look for corroboration. If for some
reason the Court is hesitant to place implicit reliance on the
testimony of the prosecutrix it may look for evidence which may
lend assurance to her testimony short of corroboration required in
the case of an accomplice. The nature of evidence required to lend
assurance to the testimony of the prosecutrix must necessarily
depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. But if a
prosecutrix is an adult and of full understanding the Court is
entitled to base a conviction on her evidence unless the same is
9. 9 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
shown to be infirm and not trustworthy. If the totality of the
circumstances appearing on the record of the case disclose that the
prosecutrix does not have a strong motive to falsely involve the
person charged the Court should ordinarily have no hesitation in
accepting her evidence”.
18. Keeping in view the ingredients of the Section with which the
accused is charged and the crystallized legal position regarding appreciation
of evidence of the victim, the evidence of the prosecution needs to be
scrutinized.
19. It is the case of the prosecution that, when the informant was
sitting on the bench of the S.K. Garden, she noticed that, the accused was
moving around her as though stalking her. Thus, she got up and sat on a
bench in another part of the garden to get away from the accused. However,
the accused followed her again. As there was nobody around the garden,
suddenly the accused unzipped his trouser and flashed her. The informant
frightened by the accused, started running towards the exit gate of the
garden, while the accused still kept following her in the same position and
then she seek the aid of Ancito (P.W.No.2) and Tushar (P.W.No.5) to grab
the accused.
20. Evidence of the informant that, when she was sitting in the S.K.
Patil Garden and watching an online C. A. lecture on her mobile, she noticed
that the accused was moving around her as though stalking her. Thus, she
got up and sat on a bench in another part of the garden to get away from the
accused. However, the accused followed her again. As there was nobody
around the garden, suddenly the accused unzipped his trouser and started
walking towards the informant, exposing his genitals. The informant
frightened by the accused, started running towards the exit gate of the
garden while the accused still kept following her in the same position, is
absolutely without a single discrepancy. Lengthy cross by the defence failed
11. 11 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
However, the said evidence cannot be considered as the previous bad
character of the accused is irrelevant as per Section 54 of the Indian
Evidence Act, except in reply.
23. Therefore, in view of discussions in foregoing paras as well as
the ingredients constituting the offences with which the accused is charged,
in my opinion, the prosecution has established the fact that, the accused by
moving around the victim and compelling her to sit on the other bench in the
garden, and evenafter that flashing her by unzipping his trouser and chasing
her shows that, he has used criminal force to her intending to outrage her
modesty. Further the prosecution has also succeeded to prove that, the
accused unzipped and flashed to the victim and also chased her, the said act
of the accused proves that he was making sexually coloured remarks and was
also following the victim to contact her to foster personal interaction
repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest as she changed the earlier
place of sitting and sat on the other bench in the garden. In such
circumstances, the prosecution has succeeded to bring home the guilt of the
accused under Sections 354, 354 (A)(iv) and 354(D) of the Indian Penal
Code. Accordingly, I answers point Nos. 1 to 3 in the Affirmative.
AS TO POINT NO. 4 :
24. In view of my findings to point Nos. 1 to 3 the prosecution has
successfully brought on record the guilt of the accused for the offences
punishable under Section 354, 354(A)(iv), 354(D) of the Indian Penal Code.
25. In my opinion, considering the nature of the offences and age of
the accused, he is not entitled for the benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of
Offenders Act.
12. 12 Judgment in CC No.650/PW/2021
26. However, before awarding any punishment, the accused should
have to be heard. Therefore, I take pause to hear the accused on the point of
quantum of sentence.
27. The accused and his Ld. Advocate submitted that, he and his
mother are very old and suffering from some medical problems. Therefore,
he prayed that, minimum punishment may kindly be imposed.
28. The learned APP submitted that since the prosecution has
proved the guilt of the accused under Sections 354, 354(A)(iv) and 354 (D)
of the Indian Penal Code, maximum punishment to him be awarded.
29. Prior to 2013, there were some provisions in the Indian Penal
Code regarding assault or using criminal force to women with intend to
outrage her modesty. However, no specific acts were incorporated in the
same. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 (Nirbhaya Act) is an Indian
legislation passed by the Lok Sabha on 19/03/2013 and by the Rajya Sabha
on 21/03/2013, which provides for amendment of Indian Penal Code, Indian
Evidence Act and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on laws related to
sexual offences. The Act introduced unprecedented provisions in the Indian
Penal Code which criminalizes sexual voyeurism and stalking and amends
legal provisions to protect the privacy of individuals, such as discontinuing
the practice of examination of the sexual history of the victim a sexual
assault for evidence. With instances of threats to individual privacy on the
rise in India, it was high time that the criminal law expands its scope to deal
with offences which violate physical privacy. The Act recognizes the broad
range of sexual crimes to which women may fall victim, and a number of
ways in which gender based discrimination manifests itself. It also
acknowledges that lesser crimes of bodily integrity often escalate to graver
ones. Sexual violence apart from being a dehumanizing act is an unlawful