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.
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.
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”.
Court Hearing First Appeal in Criminal Matter Required to Form its Own Opinion, Reiterates SC [Read Order]
Judiciary
Oct 28, 2020
Pavitra Shetty
(
Editor: Ekta Joshi
)
4 Shares
The Supreme Court on October 16, 2020, in the case of Chandrabhan Singh v. The State of Rajasthan has held that the Court hearing first appeal in criminal matters is required to form its opinion on the basis of the evidence on record and the opinion of the Trial Court.The Supreme Court made this statement in Special Leave Petition filed against the Rajasthan High Court order which had dismissed an appeal against conviction recorded by the Trial Court.The Rajasthan High Court in the order passed...
Supreme Court Allows High Courts to Frame Own Rules for Virtual Hearings
Judiciary
Oct 27, 2020
Richa Shah
(
Editor: Ekta Joshi
)
1 Shares
The Supreme Court modified a part of the guidelines issued on virtual hearings during COVID-19 and informed that High Courts may follow their own rules on video conferencing.The bench consisted of 3 judges: Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde, Justice DY Chandrachud, and Justice L Nageswara Rao. They stated that the rules framed by a High Court for virtual hearings will not only cover appellate proceedings but cover trial matters also.On Monday (26th October 2020),...
803 Views
![Proposer Duty Bound to Report Pre-existing Ailments to the Insurance Provider: SC [READ JUDGMENT]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2020/10/lj_4166_sc.jpeg)
![Supreme Court demands Explanation for Delay in Uploading Order on the Website [READ ORDER]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2020/10/lj_4573_suprem.jpeg)
![Supreme Court of India Cannot be a Place for the Governments to Walk in When they Choose to Ignore the Period of Limitation: SC [READ JUDGMENT]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2020/10/lj_6669_sc.jpeg)
![Criminal Appeal Cases to be Heard Physically from 1st October: Bombay HC [READ NOTICE]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2020/10/lj_7123_bombay.jpeg)
![The DHCBA Approaches Delhi HC Against Classification of Law Offices as Commercial Activity for Tax Purposes [READ PETITION]](https://lawstreet.co/secure/uploads/2020/10/lj_7637_nikhil.jpeg)
Facebook Comments