Canine cell line, IPC‐366, as a good model for the study of inflammatory breast cancer
We must not be swept off the feet by the approach made in the western world which has its own social milieu, its own social mores, its own permissive values, and its own code of life. The trial court on consideration of the entire evidence recorded a categorical finding that the prosecutrix was about 17 ½ years of age at the time of occurrence. Adherent and nonadherent cultures exhibited fast growth in vivo. Learned counsel for the respondent-State supported the judgment of the High Court. But, before we do that, we state, as has been repeatedly stated by this Court, that a woman who is victim of sexual assault is not an accomplice to the crime.
In prosecutions of rape, the law does not require corroboration. No evidence is forthcoming that she went there out of her own volition without any inducement by the petitioner. The Trial Court was of the view that the statement of the prosecutrix was credible. The decision of this Court in Mussauddin Ahmed 2 has no application at all. Sections 375 and 376 have been substantially changed by Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1983, and several new sections were introduced by the new Act, i. According to the supplementary report, Ext.
In our system it is more than enough if the girl crosses 16 years for exercise of her choice. Whether there was consent or not, is to be ascertained only on a careful study of all relevant circumstances. The High Court vide its judgment dated March 11, 2003 reversed the judgment of the trial court and acquitted A-1. It is to be noted that two persons faced trial for the aforesaid offences i. The courts must be sensitive and responsive to the plight of the female victim of sexual assault.
Thus, the age of the prosecutrix, according to the statement of the complainant appearing in para 7 of his cross examination, comes to about 15 or 16 years. This is important since the High Court has reversed a finding of conviction given by the Trial Judge. Under these circumstances, Sardara Singh tried to save Satish Prakash and Basti Ram from being involved in the kidnapping and rape of H. Force or fraud is essential to make abduction punishable. That you both on 27. It is further stated that consent supposes three things—a physical power, a mental power, and a free and serious use of them and if consent be obtained by intimidation, force, meditated imposition, circumvention, surprise, or undue influence, it is to be treated as a delusion, and not as a deliberate and free act of the mind.
Neither oral nor documentary evidence was produced on behalf of the accused. For the remaining offences, they were sentenced to various terms of imprisonment, but all sentences were to run concurrently and, therefore, we are not going into the details of the punishment awarded. He told her that he would take her to the police station. The High Court in a sketchy manner reversed the judgment of the trial court without discussing the deposition of the witnesses as well as all relevant points which were considered and touched upon by the trial court. We find no infirmity in the conclusion to warrant interference. Law does not require instigation to be in a particular form or that it should only be in words. Their intention was to sell her to somebody through Satte and then to equally divide the proceeds.
It was held that his act amounted to abduction. The instigation may be by conduct. There is no limitation on the part of the appellate court to review the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is found and to come to its own conclusion. Any alarm at unknown place might have endangered her life. State of Karnataka4, this Court put a word of caution that there is no straitjacket formula for determining whether consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse is voluntary, or whether it is given under a misconception of fact.
While she was returning and reached near the plot of one Vijai Bahadur, Chhotey Lal A-1 and Ramdas A-2 came from behind; A-1 caught hold of her and when she raised alarm, A-1 showed fire-arm to her and gagged her mouth. However, in the absence of any discussion or analysis of the evidence by the High Court in first appeal, we are of the opinion that a right of appeal available to Basti Ram would be taken away if we were to consider the case on its merits without the opinion of the High Court. According to the said certificate the date of birth was 19th October, 1984. State of Karnataka4, this Court put a word of caution that there is no straitjacket formula for determining whether consent given by the prosecutrix to sexual intercourse is voluntary, or whether it is given under a misconception of fact. Efforts were made to trace her out, including at the residence of relatives and at her parental home in but without success.
We must remember that a strong and efficient criminal justice system is a guarantee to the rule of law and vibrant civil society. Accordingly the trial court while holding the appellant guilty, acquitted co-accused. According to this witness, H. A-1 was arrested on December 2, 1989. If it was found to be not credible, the High Court was entitled to reject it and also her testimony before the Trial Judge. For unlike kidnapping, abduction is a continuing offence. As noted above, appeal before the High Court was dismissed.
