Subelal v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
In a criminal appeal against conviction for abduction and rape, the High Court acquitted the appellant, holding the prosecution failed to prove the prosecutrix was a minor and her conduct indicated consent.
What did the court decide?
Conviction and sentences under sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC set aside; appellant acquitted; bail bonds cancelled.
What the court decided
.[LUlfc^
c\v
r~ ^
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR
Sinfile^ench: Hpn'ble Shri Sunil Kuniar Sinha, J.
CnminaIAppealNo. 126 of 1995
Subelal
Vs.
The State of Madhya Pradesh (NowStateof Chhattisgarh)
JUDGMENT
Post for Judgment : ^707/2011
-•»•?_
Sd/-
Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge
r~<n
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that the prosecutrix was a minor below the age of consent.
Whether the findings of conviction and sentence for abduction and forcible sexual intercourse should be set-aside.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Subelal
- respondent
The State of Madhya Pradesh (State of Chhattisgarh)
Coram
Sunil Kumar Sinha
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Chhattisgarh HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- CRA/126/1995
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court