Supreme Court: Rape Conviction Possible Without S.376 Charge if POCSO Case Fails on Age Proof || SC: Mere Long Possession Can't Establish Adverse Possession; Hostile Intent is Required || Supreme Court Finds Gaps in FSSAI’s Proposed Warning Labels for Foods High in Fat, Sugar and Salt || Supreme Court Quashes ITS Officer's 'Deadwood' Retirement, Orders Rs. 15 Lakh Payment || Uttarakhand HC: District Magistrate to Establish Public Helpline within 24 Hrs amid Water Pollution || Allahabad HC: Custodial Violence and Molestation Are Crimes, Not Police Duty || Gujarat High Court: Bombay Public Trust Registration is Covered by Section 43 of the Waqf Act || J&K&L HC: Advocates not Above Law, No Immunity from Lawful Police Inquiry || Gauhati HC: Talaq-e-Hasan Valid, Requires Registration under Assam Marriage Act || NCLAT: NCLT President Empowered to Transfer Cases from One Bench to Another

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 :