Home Cases POCSO
Repository

POCSO

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.

1–3 of 3 cases
  1. High Court of Madras Crl. O.P. No. 12148 of 2017 [2017 Cri LJ 5011]

    Murugasamy Vs. The State and Ors.

    Ratio

    The court, in this case, analysed the procedure to record 164 statements of the victim/witness i.e- once the magistrate records a 164 statement, a record of the statement should be sent to the investigating officer and the jurisdictional court. The statement should not be made public. The court also observed that the term “Magistrate” under…

    Pincites

    Para 17, 21, 24, 28, 44, 48, 50, 51; Page 8-10, 14-17

    Read more
  2. High Court of Madras Crl. A. Nos. 130 of 2018 (2022-1-LW(Crl)584)

    Pastor Muniyandi @ Ramesh v. State

    Ratio

    The presumption clause of Section 29 POCSO is applicable to both the offender and the abettor of the offence. When foundational facts have been established, the accused must discharge the reverse burden cast by Sections 29 and 30 POCSO.

    Pincites

    Para 16-17; Page 8

    Read more
  3. High Court of Kerala WA No. 1651 of 2020 [MANU/KE/3811/2021]

    Justin v. Union of India and Ors.

    Ratio

    Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act are held to be Constitutional and they do not violate the Fundamental Rights, nor are they contrary to the basic criminal Principles. Presumption under Sections 29 and 30 POCSO would become operational only after the prosecution has established the foundational facts beyond reasonable doubt.

    Pincites

    Para 21-31, 35; Page 15-18

    Read more