Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Supreme Court Suspends Sentence in Section 376D IPC Case - Victim's Voluntary Actions

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court of India granted a significant reprieve to the appellant, Yasheed @ Rasheed, by suspending his sentence in a case involving Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The decision, rendered on 22nd September 2023 by a bench comprising HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR, came after the High Court's refusal to suspend his sentence.

The case revolved around Yasheed @ Rasheed and a juvenile co-accused who were alleged to have committed an offence under Section 376D IPC. What made this case peculiar was that the victim, a major, had reportedly gone of her own volition with both the accused and was restored back a week later. Initially, in her statement, she did not allege rape. However, four days later, she made such allegations in the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Trial Court's findings also indicated that the victim had voluntarily gone with the accused persons.

In light of these circumstances, the Supreme Court observed, "Having regard to all these circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that the sentence of the present appellant should be suspended and he be released on bail, subject to such terms and conditions as the Trial Court may impose. One such condition shall be the requirement of his having to report on a weekly basis to the concerned Police Station."

This decision emphasizes the importance of considering the specific circumstances of a case when deciding on the suspension of a sentence, particularly in cases involving serious offences like Section 376D IPC. The Court's ruling underscores the need for a balanced approach, taking into account all relevant factors.

The Supreme Court has requested the High Court to expedite the appeal process, with a clear indication that its observations in this order should not be construed as reflecting on the merits of the case.

The appellant was represented by Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, AOR, and Mr. Manan Daga, Adv., while the respondent, the State of Rajasthan, was represented by Mrs. Preeti Thanvi, Adv., Mr. Anand Shankar, AOR, and Mr. Onkar Nath, Adv.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the judiciary's role in ensuring fair and just outcomes, even in cases with complex and sensitive circumstances.

Date of Decision: 22nd SEPTEMBER 2023

YASHEED @ RASHEED vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN               

Latest Legal News