Supreme Court Quashes Rajasthan Village Renaming, Says Government Must Follow its Own Policy || NCLAT: NCLT Can Order Forensic Audit on its Own, No Separate Application Required || NCLAT Reiterates That IBC Cannot be Invoked as a Recovery Tool for Contractual Disputes || Delhi HC: DRI or Central Revenues Control Lab Presence in Delhi Alone Does Not Confer Jurisdiction || Delhi High Court: Software Receipts Not Taxable on PE Basis Already Rejected by ITAT || Delhi High Court: Statutory Appeals Cannot Be Denied Due to DRAT Vacancies or Administrative Delays || J&K&L HC: Failure to Frame Limitation Issue Not Fatal; Courts May Examine Limitation Suo Motu || Bombay HC: Preventing Feeding Stray Dogs at Society or Bus Stop is Not 'Wrongful Restraint' || Gujarat HC: Not All Injuries Reduce Earning Capacity; Functional Disability Must Be Assessed || Delhi HC: Framing of Charges is Interlocutory and Not Appealable under Section 21 of NIA Act

Pandurang Lalasaheb Yadav v. The State of Maharashtra - (High Court of Bombay) (16 Sep 2015)

Court accepts rape victim’s uncorroborated testimony

MANU/MH/2430/2015

Criminal

In case involving rape, where the treating doctor had not been examined by the prosecution, the Court held that the testimony of the victim was wholly trustworthy and reliable and did not require corroboration in its support. It noted a lack of evidence adduced by the accused that could lend doubt on the victim’s testimony, and the victim’s mother had taken all immediate steps that would have been expected in circumstances.

Relevant : State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Shree Kant Shekari MANU/SC/0750/2004

Tags : RAPE TESTIMONY UNCORROBORATED

Share :