Supreme Court: State Must Be Impleaded When Relief is Sought From Public Exchequer  ||  SC: Student Fees Cannot Be Increased Mid-Course Except in Exceptional Circumstances  ||  Supreme Court: ED's Delay in Sending Arrest Order Does Not By Itself Invalidate Arrest  ||  Supreme Court: Appeal Limitation Runs From NCLAT Order Pronouncement, Not Certified Copy Receipt  ||  Gujarat High Court: Waqf Tribunal Has No Supervisory Authority Over Waqf Board  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Aadhaar Fingerprint Comparison to Trace Sreekrishnapuram Murder Culprits  ||  Delhi High Court: Unnatural Death at Police Station Alone Cannot Establish Police Negligence  ||  Orissa High Court: Teacher Scolding Student for Intoxicant Use is Not Suicide Abetment  ||  Supreme Court: Drug Users are Victims and Focus Must Be on Breaking the Supply Chain  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Signatories May Join Arbitration When the Dispute Affects Their Rights    

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