NCLT: Suspended Directors Who are Prospective Resolution Applicants Cann’t Access Valuation Reports  ||  Supreme Court Clarifies Test For Granting Bail to Accused Added at Trial under Section 319 CrPC  ||  SC: Fresh Notification For Vijayawada ACB Police Station not Required After AP Bifurcation  ||  SC: Studying in a Government Institute Does Not Create an Automatic Right to a Government Job  ||  NCLT Mumbai: CIRP Claims Cannot Invoke the 12-Year Limitation Period For Enforcing Mortgage Rights  ||  NCLAT: Misnaming Guarantor as 'Director' in SARFAESI Notice Doesn't Void Guarantee Invocation  ||  Jharkhand HC: Mere Breach of Compromise Terms by an Accused Does Not Justify Bail Cancellation  ||  Cal HC: Banks Cannot Freeze a Company's Accounts Solely Due To ROC Labeling a 'Management Dispute'  ||  Rajasthan HC: Father’s Rape of His Daughter Transcends Ordinary Crime; Victim’s Testimony Suffices  ||  Delhi HC: Judge Who Reserved Judgment Must Deliver Verdict Despite Transfer; Successor Can't Rehear    

Kar. HC: S.33(5) POCSO Doesn’t Imply Accused Won’t be Given Opportunity of Cross Examination - (03 Mar 2023)

CRIMINAL

Karnataka High Court while observing that as per Section 33 of POCSO Act, victim shall not be called frequently for cross examination by the Court, has held that it doesn’t mean there shall not be any opportunity given to the accused for the purpose of cross-examination of the prosecution witness.

Tags : KARNATAKA HIGH COURT   POCSO   CROSS EXAMINATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved