Delhi High Court: Providing Email Services Does Not Make Google a Public Functionary  ||  Patna HC: Lying on a Woman Without Any Act Toward Penetration Rules Out Attempted Rape  ||  Delhi High Court: Litigants Cannot Claim a Bench Change as a Right After Roster Changes  ||  Calcutta High Court: Peaceful Protest is a Democratic Right and Cannot Be Treated as an Offence  ||  Delhi High Court: Trial Courts Must Verify an Accused’s Address Before Declaring Absconding  ||  Gujarat High Court: Judicial Officer Cannot Seek HC Judge’s Transfer over Housing Grievance  ||  Delhi High Court Orders 125 Websites Using Jio Trademark for Lottery and Gaming to Be Suspended  ||  MP High Court Strikes Down 27% OBC Quota, Restores Reservation to 14%  ||  Supreme Court: Hindu Widow’s Limited Estate Became Absolute under Succession Act  ||  Supreme Court: Prima Facie Arbitration Agreement Requires Referral to Arbitration    

Ruksana Begum and Ors. v. State - (High Court of Delhi) (19 Aug 2015)

High Court dispenses with delayed FIR and lack of corroborating evidence in accepting statement of prosecutrix

MANU/DE/2403/2015

Criminal

In a case where the underage Prosecutrix was kidnapped by the Appellants and subjected to rape by several persons, the High Court upheld the conviction of the Appellants. It noted a delay of over two weeks in lodging a 'missing person report' by the parents of the Prosecutrix, failure by the investigating agency to provide call records of the Appellants, materials to ascertain if other girls were misused and non-determination of the identity of individuals who had established sexual relations with the Prosecutrix. However, these factors were held to not be sufficient to discard the Prosecutrix's cogent testimony, or refute the fact that the Appellants were running a prostitution ring.

Tags : CRIMINAL   RAPE   PROSTITUTION   DELAY   FIR  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved