Unregistered Agreement Of Sale Entered Before Attachment Cannot Defeat Decree-Holder’s Claim: Andhra Pradesh High Court No Presumption That Joint Family Possesses Joint Property; Female Hindu Absolute Owner Of Property Purchased In Her Name: Allahabad High Court Age Determination Must Strictly Follow Hierarchy Of Documents Under JJ Act: Orissa High Court Acquits Man Of POCSO Charges Once 'C' Form Declarations Are Signed, Burden Shifts To Buyer To Prove Payment Of Outstanding Dues: Madras High Court Section 213 Succession Act No Bar To Eviction Suit If Claim Is Based On Landlord-Tenant Relationship, Not Title Under Will: Bombay High Court Meritorious Candidate Wrongfully Denied Appointment Entitled To Notional Seniority & Old Pension Scheme: J&K & Ladakh High Court 6-Year Delay In Propounding Will & Hostile Attesting Witness Constitute 'Grave Suspicious Circumstances': Delhi High Court Refuses Probate Section 319 CrPC Power Cannot Be Exercised Based On FIR Or Section 161 Statements: Allahabad High Court Quashes Summoning Of Unmarried Sisters Bail Proceedings Cannot Be Converted Into Recovery Proceedings; Court Can't Order Sale Of Accused's Property: Supreme Court Able-Bodied Husband Cannot Defeat Maintenance Claim By Projecting Income Below Minimum Wages: Delhi High Court Recording Section 313 CrPC Statement Before Cross-Examination Of Prosecution Witness Does Not Vitiate Trial: Karnataka High Court Murder By Unknown Assailants Is Not 'Accidental Death' Under Mukhymantri Kisan Bima Yojna: Allahabad High Court Section 311 CrPC | Court Not A Passive Bystander, Must Summon Material Witness If Essential For Just Decision: Rajasthan High Court GST Act Does Not Prima Facie Prohibit Consolidated Show-Cause Notices For Multiple Years: Bombay HC Refers Issue To Larger Bench 90% Burn Injuries No Bar To Making Statement; Dying Declaration Can Be Sole Basis For Conviction If Found Truthful: Madhya Pradesh High Court

In Sexual Harassment Cases Magistrate Should Direct to Register FIR 156(3) Cr.P.C: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


D.D-August 05, 2022

The Supreme Court recently declared that police should not put impediments in the way of victims reporting sexual harassment by refusing to file a FIR.

Apex Court Stated "It is crucial that all courts continue to recognise that the legal procedure tends to be considerably more burdensome for complainants who are potentially suffering with trauma and societal shame as a result of the unjustified stigma linked to victims of sexual harassment and assault."

Apex Court observed that wherever a cognizable offence is established in a complaint, the police must file a FIR.

The Supreme Court stated that it was regrettable that the police did nothing in this situation. Every police officer has a moral obligation to perform their duties with integrity for the community. The police must be aware that they are frequently the first people a victim of a crime or a complainant contacts. They ought to follow the law and make it easy to file a FIR. Of course, they have to be neutral and fair to all members of the public. This is even more crucial in cases of sexual harassment or violence because the victims, who are typically women, experience severe social shame when they try to report it.

The Apex Court also observed that  the courts must work to prevent burdening the victims with the process of trying to bring the offenders to justice. People who are upset shouldn't have to jump through hoops just to file a complaint and start an investigation, especially if their complaint prima facie establishes a cognizable offence.

XYZ

Vs

State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors

Download Judgment

[gview file="http://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/4084_2022_3_19_37087_Judgement_05-Aug-2022.pdf"]

Latest Legal News