Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

3 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

ARJUN SINGHversusSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2008 INSC 120822 October 2008Appeal(s) allowed

Six persons were charged with offences under Sections 452, 323 read with 34, and 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code for abducting and raping a woman. The prosecutrix identified some of the accused by hearing them address each other by names, but the appellant, Arjun Singh, was not apprehended at the scene and no test i

BAL KISHANversusSTATE. OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

2008 INSC 121022 October 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The prosecution alleged that Bal Kishan, along with others, forcibly dragged the prosecutrix to a forest and raped her. The trial court convicted the accused based on the testimonies of the prosecutrix, her son and an elderly neighbour, despite finding that the test identification parade conducted by the magistrate did

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESHversusGITA RAM

2000 INSC 4388 September 2000Disposed off

The respondent, Gita Ram, was charged under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The case was committed by a magistrate to a Sessions Court that had been designated as a Special Court for offences under the SC/ST Act, and that Court trie

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search