Repository

Case Repository

1–3 of 3 cases
  1. High Court of Haryana CRA-D-1903-DB-2014 (O&M) [2022 Cri LJ 1696]

    Sanjay vs. State of Haryana

    Ratio

    Once a child witness, if found competent to depose to the facts and reliable one such evidence could be the basis of conviction. In other words even in the absence of oath, the evidence of a child witness can be considered under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 provided that such witness is…

    Pincites

    Para 8, 10, 18, 19, 21-24; Page 3, 8, 10

  2. 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

  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