Important judgments on POCSO Act POCSO Act Imp. Judgments

Important judgments on POCSO Act

 POCSO Act Imp. Judgments


1. Arjun Malge Vs. State of Maharashtra Bom HC 2021

Held : Notice of hearing of case and bail application is mandatory to victim. 


2.Aparna Bhat vs. State of M P. Supreme Court 2021

Held: Notice to victim must. Bail conditions should not be arbitrary. 


3.Nipun Saxena vs. Union of India Supreme Court 2019

Identity of victim should be concealed. Guidelines given. 


4.Sangita Tanpure Vs. state of Maharashtra 2020 Bom HC

Identity of victim to be concealed. Not to mention name in charge, deposition. More elaborate guidelines laid down. 


5.State of Karnataka Vs. Shivanna 2014 Supreme Court

Copy of statement under section 164 Cr. P. C. of victim not to be given to accused until filing of chargesheet. 


6. Atul Ambale vs. Maharashtra 2022 Bom HC

Held.- Evidence of victim to be recorded within 30 days from chargesheet. 

(Directions to POCSO Courts) 


7. XYZ  vs. state of MP 2022 Supreme Court

Incamera proceedings, Screen, how to conduct cross of victim. 

Guidelines issued. 


8. Jarnail Singh vs. State of Haryana 2013 Supreme Court

Mahadeo Mhaske vs Maharashtra 2013 Supreme Court

How to determine age of victim


9. Vardrajan vs. State of MP 1965 Supreme Court

Age of understanding of victim (363 IPC cases) 


10. Amol Barsagade vs. Maharashtra 2018 Bom HC

Presumptions under pocso Act. 


With Regards and Requesting you to kindly support me and Elect me with 1st Preferential Vote by marking as ONE besides my Name Bharath L, Sl No 14 for KSBC Election 


SL No 14- Bharath L. MBA.,LLB

Advocate, High court of Karnataka Bangalore

KSBC ELECTION CANDIDATE - SL No 14 

9844734166




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Whether Issuing a Blank Cheque under Indian Law: Legal Validity, Section 138, and Judicial Precedents

  Whether Issuing a Blank Cheque under Indian Law: Legal Validity, Section 138, and Judicial Precedents Issuing a blank cheque , where only the signature is affixed and all other particulars are left blank, is a common practice in many business and personal transactions in India. While this might seem risky at first glance, Indian law has laid down clear principles regarding the legality and implications of such instruments. Is Issuing a Blank Cheque Legal? Yes, issuing a blank cheque is legally valid if the cheque is signed and voluntarily handed over to the payee , with authorization to fill in the remaining details, such as the amount and date. This practice is covered under Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 , which recognizes the authority of a holder in due course to complete an inchoate instrument. Relevance of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 deals with the dishonour of cheques due to insufficiency of funds or stop payment instructio...
Read more

When Sale Deed Is Void, Suit For Possession Governed By Limitation Period Of 12 Years Under Article 65 Instead Of Art 59 : Supreme Court.

  When Sale Deed Is Void, Suit For Possession Governed By Limitation Period Of 12 Years Under Article 65 Instead Of Art 59 : Supreme Court. Cause Title: SHANTI DEVI (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. GORAN VERSUS JAGAN DEVI & ORS. The Supreme Court on Friday (Sep.12) held that a suit instituted seeking possession of immovable property on the ground that the defendant's sale deed is void is governed by the 12-year limitation period under Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963, rather than the shorter 3-year period under Article 59 of the Act. A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan clarified that where possession is claimed over property by the defendant based on a forged and void sale deed, he suit can be filed within 12 years, as such possession is treated as adverse to the plaintiff. “Therefore, the plaintiff could indeed have maintained an action to obtain possession of the property on the basis of her title and filed the same within the period of 12 years from the da...
Read more

Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines To SHOs On Summoning Persons U/S 35 BNSS

  Karnataka High Court Issues Guidelines To SHOs On Summoning Persons U/S 35 BNSS High Court of Karnataka Bangalore  Bench: Justice M. Nagaprasanna WP No 15125/2024 (GM-RES) REPORTED  DATE : 19/07/2024 Cause Title- Tavaragi Rajashekhar Shiva Prasad v. State of Karnataka & Ors The Karnataka High Court has issued guidelines drawing a check list to Station House Officers (SHOs) for summoning persons under Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by a man calling in question a notice issued by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Amruthalli Police Station under Section 41(1)(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna said, “In the light of the mandate of law under Sections 41 and 41-A of the Cr.P.C., which is now under Section 35 of the BNSS, it becomes necessary to the State to issue guidelines drawing a check list to all those Station House Officers, akin to what...
Read more