https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197428 The SC held that rape was not proved because penetration, even if slight, was not established by the prosecutrix's evidence or the medical material. The surrounding facts also did not show an attempt to commit rape under the statutory test requiring intention to have sexual intercourse despite resistance. The proven conduct did, however, constitute criminal force on a woman with intent to outrage modesty, and the participation of both accused supported liability on the basis of common intention. Accordingly, the conviction for rape was not sustained and was replaced by conviction for outraging modesty with common intention. en-us Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jan 2018 11:22:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197428 The SC held that rape was not proved because penetration, even if slight, was not established by the prosecutrix's evidence or the medical material. The surrounding facts also did not show an attempt to commit rape under the statutory test requiring intention to have sexual intercourse despite resistance. The proven conduct did, however, constitute criminal force on a woman with intent to outrage modesty, and the participation of both accused supported liability on the basis of common intention. Accordingly, the conviction for rape was not sustained and was replaced by conviction for outraging modesty with common intention. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 10 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197428