<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1991 (7) TMI 374 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182866</link>
    <description>Credible testimony of the victim can sustain a rape conviction without independent corroboration where the evidence is consistent on material facts. Absence of consent was established by the surrounding circumstances of forcible assault, protest and struggle, with section 114A of the Evidence Act supporting, rather than creating, that conclusion. Revisional jurisdiction is exceptional and not a second appeal on facts; where the trial court, appellate court and High Court have returned concurrent findings and no manifest error or miscarriage of justice is shown, interference is unwarranted. The conviction and sentence were left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 May 2016 13:24:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (7) TMI 374 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182866</link>
      <description>Credible testimony of the victim can sustain a rape conviction without independent corroboration where the evidence is consistent on material facts. Absence of consent was established by the surrounding circumstances of forcible assault, protest and struggle, with section 114A of the Evidence Act supporting, rather than creating, that conclusion. Revisional jurisdiction is exceptional and not a second appeal on facts; where the trial court, appellate court and High Court have returned concurrent findings and no manifest error or miscarriage of justice is shown, interference is unwarranted. The conviction and sentence were left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182866</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>