Supreme Court Acquits Man in Rape Case Over Improper Judicial Reasoning
Headline by Prism · from 1 report
The Supreme Court acquitted a man of rape after overturning a lower court conviction that relied on the judge's personal value judgments.
Deccan HeraldThe brief
Written by software from the 1 report below.
- The Supreme Court of India overturned the conviction of Paramjit Singh Bedi in a long-standing rape case.
- The bench ruled that a trial judge cannot selectively accept parts of a witness's testimony while rejecting others regarding the same event.
- Judges noted that the original conviction relied on the trial court's personal conjectures rather than hard evidence.
- The court concluded that an act being deemed immoral does not justify a criminal conviction without credible proof.
Who said what
Only words found exactly in the article are shown, attributed and linked to the line they came from.
Supreme Court
2 quotes · 1 outlet
“There cannot be partial rejection of the evidence of the prosecutrix for the purpose of Section 366 IPC and partial acceptance of the very same statement for the purpose of proving the charge under Section 376 IPC,”
In the article
…A bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Atul S Chandurkar observed that while an accused can be convicted of rape on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix, that statement must inspire the confidence of the court. “ There cannot be partial rejection of the evidence of the prosecutrix for the purpose of Section 366 IPC and partial acceptance of the very same statement for the purpose of proving the charge under Section 376 IPC, ” the court said. The appellant, Paramjit Singh Bedi, had challenged a September 12, 2013 judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that upheld his conviction and 10-year rigorous imprisonment sentence imposed by…
“Such a charge must be proved on the basis of hard evidence and not on the basis of the surmises and conjectures based on the value judgment of the presiding judge. Immorality of an act sans credible evidence cannot justify a conviction”
In the article
…was a “bundle of contradictions”. The bench opined while the conduct of the appellant may be immoral and unethical, that by itself would not justify a conviction under Section 376 IPC without any clinching evidence. " Such a charge must be proved on the basis of hard evidence and not on the basis of the surmises and conjectures based on the value judgment of the presiding judge. Immorality of an act sans credible evidence cannot justify a conviction ,” the bench said. The Supreme Court set aside the judgments of the sessions court and the High Court and acquitted the appellant of the charge under Section 376 IPC. New Delhi: The Supreme Court has acquitted a man in…
Related reporting
Grouped by subject or cast while the story boundary is under human review. No chronology is implied.
Coverage
1 outlet
All filed from India
NamedIndia · Punjab and Haryana High Court · Atul S. Chandurkar · Paramjit Singh Bedi · Supreme Court · Ujjal Bhuyan
The 1 report is listed beside the record.
Corrections and versions
A correction says what was wrong and why. Every earlier headline and brief of this record is kept.
Something wrong?
Say what, and it arrives with this record's address filled in. A correction is welcome.
Ask this story
Answers cite the 1 report above, or say they can't.