MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Even Relative have No Right To Touch Body of Girl's consent: Mumbai court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


A court in Mulund, Mumbai, recently sentenced a 43-year-old man to one month in jail and a 1,000 fine for holding his minor cousin's hand without her consent and proposing marriage [The State of Maharashtra vs Manikumar Wilson Nadar].

Metropolitan Magistrate RD Dange stated that the accused's relationship to the victim did not give him permission to touch her without her consent.

"In the present case, PW1 testified that the defendant's actions made her feel insulted and ashamed. Even though the accused is PW1's relative, he had no right to touch her without her consent "the Judge ruled.

In February 2009, when she was in ninth grade, the minor filed a complaint at the Bhandup police station under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing harm) and 354 (outraging the modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). She claimed that while she was walking home from school, her cousin grabbed her hand, proposed marriage, and invited her to his home.

Regarding the violation of Section 354, the court found the prosecution witnesses' testimony credible and convicted the defendant.

However, the defendant was acquitted of the Section 323 offence because the court did not believe the complainant and her sister's testimony that the defendant had struck the victim.

The defendant pleaded for clemency and asked to be released on a bond of good behaviour under the Probation of Offenders Act.

The court determined that the case did not qualify for the benefits of the Probation of Offenders Act due to the nature of the offence, the victim's age, and the ongoing nature of the other complaints.

The State of Maharashtra

versus

Manikumar Wilson Nadar

 

 

 

Latest Legal News