Wife wants to book her Husband under Sec 377 of IPC.

Judiciary Jul 23, 2018 Lawstreet News Network 5 Shares

Supreme court of India has agreed to hear the plea made by the woman who wants to book her husband under Section 377 IPC for forcing her to perform oral sex on him.

Also Read - SC Gives Judgement in Suo Moto Case for Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 OF N.I. Act 1881 [READ ORDER]

A bench of Supreme Court of India comprising of Justice N.V. Ramana will consider the question raised by the woman, who was a child bride, as to whether non-consensual oral sex amounted to an “unnatural offence” under the Section 377IPC.

In her petition, the woman challenged the Gujarat High Court’s finding in her case that Section 377 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 did not include oral sex but only sexual acts like sodomy, bestiality, and buggery.

Also Read - Fictional Convenience of One Party Cannot be a Ground to Transfer Cases U/S 25 Of CPC: SC [READ ORDER]

In her petition not only woman said that the high court found her husband guilty of assault with intent to insult the modesty of a woman but also argued that her husband’s crime went beyond just an insult.

She has asked the court to check whether Section 377 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 consider only to buggery, sodomy, and bestiality and does not consider "other sexual encounters against the order of nature and which can be described as carnal penetration”.

SC Gives Judgement in Suo Moto Case for Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 OF N.I. Act 1881 [READ ORDER]

Judiciary Apr 19, 2021 Mathews Savio ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 8 Shares

A five-member bench of the Supreme Court gave its judgement in a Suo Moto case relating to the expeditious trial of cases relating to dishonoured cheques under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The bench which heard the matter included Chief Justice S. A. Bobde along with Justices L. Nageswara Rao, B. R. Gavai, A. S. Bopanna and S. Ravindra Bhat.In 2016 while considering a matter related to the dishonour of two cheques which were pending before the courts for 16...

Read full post

Fictional Convenience of One Party Cannot be a Ground to Transfer Cases U/S 25 Of CPC: SC [READ ORDER]

Judiciary Apr 19, 2021 Mathews Savio ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 7 Shares

While deciding a transfer petition concerning a commercial dispute (M/S Fumo Chem Pvt. Ltd. V. M/S Raj Process Equipments And Systems Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.) the Supreme Court observed that mere convenience of one of the parties is not a ground to transfer cases under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.The matter was decided by a Single-Judge Bench comprising of Justice Aniruddha Bose through Video Conferencing.The commercial dispute was about the supply of certain items. The...

Read full post