<?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>2009 (2) TMI 934 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461374</link>
    <description>Completed rape was not proved because the medical evidence did not establish penetration, but the proved facts and surrounding circumstances showed overt acts beyond preparation, supporting conviction for attempted rape under Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction under Section 376 was therefore unsustainable, while the attempt conviction was upheld. Abetment under Section 109 was also not made out because intentional instigation or active complicity linked to the principal offence was not proved on the facts found, so that conviction was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2025 11:31:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=811140" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 934 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461374</link>
      <description>Completed rape was not proved because the medical evidence did not establish penetration, but the proved facts and surrounding circumstances showed overt acts beyond preparation, supporting conviction for attempted rape under Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction under Section 376 was therefore unsustainable, while the attempt conviction was upheld. Abetment under Section 109 was also not made out because intentional instigation or active complicity linked to the principal offence was not proved on the facts found, so that conviction was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461374</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>