SC: Confirmation of an Auction Sale Does Not Bar Judicial Scrutiny of Reserve Price Valuation  ||  Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction of Four Men in a 1998 Gang Rape Case  ||  Supreme Court: Privy Purse Privileges of Princely Rulers are Not Enforceable Legal Rights  ||  Delhi HC: Repeated Court Summons May Distress and Re-Traumatize Child Sexual Assault Victims  ||  Jammu and Kashmir High Court: Labeling Someone as a Terrorist Associate Amounts to Defamation  ||  Delhi HC: Setting Aside or Altering a Judge’s Order by a Higher Court Doesn’t Affect Their Integrity  ||  Delhi High Court: Accused Cannot be Faulted For Smart Replies; Interrogator Must be Sharper  ||  Supreme Court: Belated Jurisdictional Challenge Impermissible After Participation in Arbitration  ||  Supreme Court: Failure to Prove Specific Overt Acts of Each Unlawful Assembly Member Not Fatal  ||  Supreme Court: Parental Salary Alone Cannot Determine OBC Creamy Layer Status    

Del. HC: For Wrongful Confinement, It Isn’t Necessary That Victim Must be Immobilized By Tying Hands - (21 Jul 2025)

CRIMINAL

Delhi High Court has observed that for wrongful confinement, it is not necessary that the victim must be immobilized by tying his hands. Confinement within a room, also would suffice in order to make out a prima facie case for framing charge for offence under Section 342 of IPC.

Tags : DELHI HIGH COURT   WRONGFUL CONFINEMENT   SECTION 342  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved