Conviction Of Accused Only On The Basis Of Presumption Under POCSO Act Would Offend Article 20(3) and Article 21
On Thursday, Tripura HC held that the conviction of an accused only on the idea of presumption under Section 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act would offend Art. 20(3) [No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself] and Art. 21 [Right to Life] of the Constitution of India.
The Court observe that such convictions forming basis only on the basis of presumption was not the objective of the legislature in incorporating the said provisions under the Act and that the presumption of innocence may be a right given to us. If the fundamental facts of the prosecution case are laid by the Prosecution by leading legally admissible evidence, the duty of the accused is to rebut it, by establishing from the evidence on record that he has not committed the offence.
Bombay HC Calls For Corrective Measures: After a Girl Who Was Allegedly Sexually Assaulted & Ravaged Was Left On A Railway Platform
Bombay High Court directed the Investigating officer to take corrective measures and trace the victim girl. The Bench, reminding the State of its duty to take preventive measures to stop youth exploitation, stated, "There are legislations, which mandate the State in consonance with the imperative mandate contained in the Directive Principles of State Policy, to ensure that the youth is not exploited."
In this case, in an auto-rickshaw a girl was being sexually assaulted when a passage-by noticed and intervened, later a traffic police reached there and the said person was apprehended. The Applicant submitted that the Girl was into flesh trade and whatever had happened it had been together with her consent. When A.P.P. was asked about the victim and her present status, it was submitted that she continued to dwell on Andheri Railway Station to this the Court remarked, "It is surprising, rather shocking to notice that a woman , who had met with a sexual abuse and ravage is left on a railway platform in such a fashion ."
P&H High Court Imposes 1 Lakh Fine On Woman Who Sought CBI Probe In Her 'Fake Rape' Case
In his above mentioned case, it was observed that an attempt had been made to not only abuse the process of law but also overawe the authorities, the Punjab & Haryana High Court imposed Rs. 1 lakh fine on Woman who sought CBI probe in her 'fake rape' case.
The Court remarked, "It is obvious that the petitioner has leveled false and frivolous allegations against respondent No. 7 and has gone to the extent of lodging the FIR in question and recording the statement before the Magistrate on 19.6.2020. The petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands." The allegations raised by the petitioner within the FIR weren't proved because the call location of the petitioner and respondent No. 7 showed different place as from the one where the alleged rape was committed along with other false accusations, based on this, the Court dismissed the case.
Justice NV Ramana states that "There Are Many Sub-standard Law Colleges In The Country, Which is A Very Worrying Trend. Judiciary is Attempting To Correct It"
Justice Ramana states that the consequences of the poor quality of legal education in the country is the exploding pendency in the country. There are nearly 3.8 crore cases pending altogether the Courts in India despite the massive number of advocates within the country.
Justice Ramana further remarked that the goal of a school of law is to form a Law Graduate socially relevant and technically sound. According to him, young law graduates must be the "social engineers" because law is considered as "an instrument of social change". Talking about hands on experience he remarked that, "In order to further their practical knowledge, Law Schools should expose students to clinical education through Lok Adalats, Legal Aid Centers and Arbitration and Mediation Centers. Students should actively work with Legal Service Authorities, because it would give them the chance to figure closely with the justice delivery system."
SC states: Acquittal Based on Benefit of Doubt in Serious Crime Cannot Make Candidate Eligible for Public Employment
In this case, Love Kush Meena cleared the recruitment of constable in Rajasthan Police Service, although he was not appointed in view of being tried in a criminal case. It was found that after trial that, though he was acquitted, the charges against him were not of a trivial nature but were serious offences and the candidate was not acquitted by the Court honorably.
Against this denial of appointment, he approached the Rajasthan High Court. The High Court allowed his writ petition observing that since no cogent evidence connecting the accused person to commission of offence was found, he was not disentitled for appointment to the post of a constable, notwithstanding his involvement during a criminal case.