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.

11–17 of 17 cases
  1. Supreme Court of India (2017) 2 SCC 51

    State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar alias Sunny

    Ratio

    The testimony of a survivor in sexual offences cases is vital unless compelling reasons necessitate corroboration. Courts should find no difficulty to convict on the testimony of the survivor of a sexual assault alone if the testimony inspires confidence.

    Pincites

    Para 31, Page 11

  2. Supreme Court of India (2010) 8 SCC 191

    Vijay alias Chinee v. State of Madhya Pradesh

    Ratio

    Conviction can be based solely on the testimony of the child survivor if it is trustworthy and reliable, even in the absence of corroborating evidence or injuries. Minor discrepancies in her does not make it unreliable.

    Pincites

    Para 9-15 Page 195-198, 204, 205

  3. Supreme Court of India (2000) 5 SCC 30

    State of Rajasthan v. N.K

    Ratio

    Convictions for rape can be founded solely on the testimony of the survivor, without the need for corroboration. However, if the court finds the testimony insufficiently credible on its own, it may seek additional evidence to bolster the survivor's account. A survivor's testimony under oath should be believed unless the testimony is such as would…

    Pincites

    Para 11, 19 Page 39,42-44

  4. High Court of Himachal Pradesh Criminal Appeal No. 438 of 2019 [2022 SCC OnLine HP 4139]

    Vijay Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

    Ratio

    Convictions can be sustained on the sole testimony of the child survivor when found cogent and reliable, and corroboration is not necessary.. The testimony of the child survivor of a sex related offence must be given the same evidentiary value as that to an injured person in cases of physical violence.

    Pincites

    Para 13, 18; Page 4, 5

  5. Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal Nos. 1097-1098 of 2018 (MANU/SC/0167/2022)

    Pappu v. State of Uttar Pradesh

    Ratio

    Where foundational facts have been established, the presumption under section 29 POCSO becomes operational and the accused is bound to rebut the presumption.

    Pincites

    Para 32; Page 39 & 40.

  6. High Court of Tripura at Agartala Crl. A (J) 34 of 2019 [MANU/TR/0211/2021]

    Lalmalsom Kaipeng v. The State of Tripura

    Ratio

    The duty to rebut the presumption under Section 29 POCSO arising only after the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the foundational facts.The burden to rebut the presumption can be discharged by the accused through effective cross-examination, or by adducing defence evidence or by the accused himself tendering oral evidence. The presumption and the duty to…

    Pincites

    Para 27-33; Page 5, 6 & 7

  7. Supreme Court of India Criminal Appeal No. 1410 of 2021 (AIR2022SC13)

    Attorney General of India and Ors. v. Satish and Ors.

    Ratio

    While sexual intent under S. 8 POCSO is a question of fact, the Court is entitled to raise the presumption under S. 30 POCSO with regard to the culpable state of mind of the accused when the court is satisfied with the existence of a fact beyond reasonable doubt.

    Pincites

    Para 36-37, 42; Page 15, 17