Repository

Case Repository

1–5 of 5 cases
  1. Supreme Court of India (Crl.) No. 5073/2011 [(2014) 8 SCC 913]

    The State of Karnataka by Nonavinakere Police v. Shivanna alias Tarkari Shivanna

    Ratio

    The high court issued interim directions to all the police stations for the recording of 164 statement: The investigating officer should preferably be female. The IO shall take immediate steps to take the prosecutrix to a female MM magistrate for the recording of the 164 statement, within 24 hours. In case the time period is…

    Pincites

    Para 1, 2, 9; Page 1, 3

  2. 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

  3. Supreme Court of India Crl. A. No. 1820 of 2017 [AIR 2017 SC 5414 ]

    State of Maharashtra v. Bandu

    Ratio

    There is a need to create a conducive environment to encourage vulnerable witnesses to make their statements. Screens or a similar arrangement must be made to ensure that they don’t see the face or body of the accused. Questions for cross examination must be given in writing to the presiding officer of the Court who…

    Pincites

    Para 10; Page 2

  4. Supreme Court of India Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 33 of 1997 [(2004) 5 SCC 518]

    Sakshi v. Union of India

    Ratio

    Guidelines laid down specifically for recording of evidence of in cases of child sexual abuse:(i) a screen or some such arrangements may be made where the victim or witnesses (who may be equally vulnerable like the victim) do not see the body or face of the accused; (ii) the questions put in cross-examination on behalf…

    Pincites

    Para 1, 34; Page 1, 18.1

  5. High Court of Manipur Crl. Petn. No. 7 of 2019 [2019 SCC OnLine Mani 164]

    Lalsuonglien and Ors. v. State of Manipur

    Ratio

    Provisions of the POCSO reiterated by the court: The child may have a parent or other trusted person present at the time of testifying and can call for assistance from an interpreter, special educator, or other professional while giving evidence; further, the child is not to be called repeatedly to testify in Court and may…

    Pincites

    Para 2, 15, 17, 19, 22; Page 1, 3, 4