SC: Forfeiture of Earnest Money Impermissible When Both Buyer and Seller are at Fault || Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence Cannot Defeat Speedy Trial; Pre-Trial Detention is Punishment || SC: Terrorist Act under UAPA Includes Conspiracies to Disrupt Essential Supplies, Not Just Violence || Supreme Court Directs Measures to Prevent False and Frivolous Complaints Against Judicial Officers || SC: Mere Participation in Arbitration Doesn’t Bar Challenging Arbitrator; Waiver Must be in Writing || SC: Under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC, the Plaintiff, as Dominus Litis, Cannot be Forced to Add a Defendant || SC: Law Does Not Change With a New Bench; Decisions of a Coordinate Bench are Binding || Delhi HC Absence of Formal Arrest under Section 311A Crpc Does Not Bar Giving Handwriting Samples || Del HC: Security Guards Performing Duties Cannot Be Prosecuted For Wrongful Restraint or Molestation || Bombay HC: Housing Society Earning From Telecom Towers Isn’t An ‘Industry’; Staff Get No Gratuity

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 :