IPC, Section 375

IPC, Section 375 - Criminal trial  -  Age – Benefit of doubt  - Prosecutrix in her deposition dithered with regard to her age by first stating she was sixteen years on the date of occurrence and then corrected herself to state she was thirteen -  Though she alleged that the appellant outraged her modesty at the point of a knife while she was on way to school, no name of the school has been disclosed either by the prosecutrix or her parents - If the prosecutrix was studying in a school there is no explanation why proof of age was not furnished on basis of documentary evidence such as school register – In evidence there is wide variation with regard to the age of the prosecutrix -  The trial court held the prosecutrix to be fourteen years of age applying the rule of the thumb  - In absence of positive evidence being led by the prosecution with regard to the age of the prosecutrix on the date of occurrence, the possibility of her being above the age of eighteen years on the date cannot be ruled out. The benefit of doubt therefore has to be given to the appellant. #2020 SCeJ 1775


vCivil Law, updates

v Criminal Law, updates



IPC, Section 375 – Delay in lodging FIR of 4 years - Criminal trial – Held, appellant belonged to the Scheduled Tribe while the prosecutrix belonged to the Christian community, they professed different religious beliefs in a traditional society. They both resided in the same village and were known to each other. The nature and manner of allegations, coupled with the letters exchanged between them, make it apparent that their love for each other grew and matured over a sufficient period of time. They were both smitten by each other and passions of youth ruled over their minds and emotions. The physical relations that followed was not isolated or sporadic in nature, but regular over the years. The prosecutrix had even gone and resided in the house of the appellant. In our opinion, the delay of four years in lodgement of the FIR, at an opportune time of seven days prior to the appellant solemnising his marriage with another girl, on the pretext of a promise to the prosecutrix raises serious doubts about the truth and veracity of the allegations levelled by the prosecutrix. #2020 SCeJ 1775




Exhaustive Headnotes with Full text daily (nearly) in your email

2020 @ Rs 1000/- 

Subscribe Here 




Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.