https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378538 Discharge from the offence of rape was upheld because the complaint and Section 164 CrPC statement were vague and lacked specific allegations about acts, dates, or circumstances. The Court also noted substantial delay in lodging the complaint and the absence of medical or other corroborative material supporting the prosecutrix's version. On the investigation record, these deficiencies meant there was no grave suspicion sufficient to justify framing of charge under Section 376 IPC. The revision was dismissed. en-us Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Apr 2019 14:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378538 Discharge from the offence of rape was upheld because the complaint and Section 164 CrPC statement were vague and lacked specific allegations about acts, dates, or circumstances. The Court also noted substantial delay in lodging the complaint and the absence of medical or other corroborative material supporting the prosecutrix's version. On the investigation record, these deficiencies meant there was no grave suspicion sufficient to justify framing of charge under Section 376 IPC. The revision was dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378538