SC: Mere Mention of 'Arbitration' Does not Form Agreement Without Clear Intent  ||  SC: No Entitlement to Job as Compensation for Land Acquired under Land Acquisition Act  ||  SC: Court Cannot Probe Credibility of FIR Allegations While Entertaining Quashing Plea  ||  SC: Notice under Indian Forest Act Does not Transfer Private Forests to Maharashtra Law  ||  SC: Unilateral Termination of Sale Agreement Invalid if Contract Does Not Permit it  ||  NCLAT: Pre-COVID Defaults do not Exempt Debtors From Insolvency Proceedings  ||  NCLAT: Liquidator Must Obtain NCLT Approval Before Conducting Private Sale  ||  NCLAT: Contract Termination for Performance Default Not Barred by CIRP Moratorium  ||  Kerala HC: Partial Specific Performance Not Allowed if Defendant Holds Undisputed Property Title  ||  Kerala HC: Complainant Must be Informed if Probe Against FIR-Named Accused is Dropped    

Madras HC: Rigidity of Section 33(5) of POCSO Act Gets Diluted Once Victim Attains Majority - (04 Jul 2022)

CRIMINAL

Madras High Court has held that Section 33 (5) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act was introduced to ensure that child is not repeatedly called to Court, however if the victim has attained majority, she can be called for cross examination.

Tags : MADRAS HIGH COURT   POCSO   CROSS EXAMINATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved