Supreme Court of India
Maheshwar Tigga v. The State of Jharkhand
INSC stands for INDIAN SUPREME COURT. A neutral citation scheme assigned by the Court itself, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter. INSC is the neutral citation scheme assigned by the Supreme Court, so a judgment can be cited without depending on a commercial law reporter.
2 Supreme Court benches have cited this judgment.
From the headnote
Penal Code, 1860: ss.376, 323 and 341 – Prosecution under – Alleging that the accused raped the prosecutrix at the point of knife 4 years ago when she was 14 years old and had continued to establish physical relations with her under pretext of marriage – Convicti on under – By courts below – Appeal to Supreme Court – Held: There i s wide variation in the evidence with regard to the age of prosecutrix – Trial court had found the prosecutrix to be 14 years of age on the date of incident on the basis of her deposition – In the ab sence of positive evidence as regards her age, the possibility of
Authorities it was built on
- 2013 Deepak Gulati v. State of Haryana
- 2003 Uday v. State of Karnataka
- 2019 Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- 2018 Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
- 2013 Kaini Rajan v. State of Kerala
- 2011 K. P. Thimmappa Gowda v. State of Karnataka
- 2019 Parkash Chand v. State of Himachal Pradesh
- 2004 Naval Kishore Singh v. State of Bihar
Where later benches applied it
Of those, 2 referred to
Sign in free to read it
- The full judgment, page by page, as published in the Supreme Court Reports
- The ratio: what the Court held, verbatim, with the page it sits on
- Every bench that relied on it, and every bench that argued against it
- Search every reported judgment, by party, citation or question
- Download the PDF, copy pinpoint citations ready for a filing
An email address, no password.