Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Abdul Khalque Vs. Emperor

Abdul Khalque vs Emperor

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Feb 01, 1933
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/883693

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kolkata
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), Section 297 - Rape, charge for--Accused not raising plea of consent--Direction that age or consent of girl need not be considered whether constitutes misdirection--Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), Section 366. -

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abdul Khalque

Respondent

Emperor

Legal References

Reported In
145Ind.Cas.923

Excerpt

criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 297 - rape, charge for--accused not raising plea of consent--direction that age or consent of girl need not be considered whether constitutes misdirection--penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 366. - rankin, c.j.1. in my opinion this appeal succeeds. the case was that the accused caught hold of and committed rape on a girl who, according to the medical evidence, would appear to have had sexual intercourse before. the medical evidence is somewhat indeterminate and the learned judge himself says on the question of the age of the girl that it was in no way proved that the girl was under 14 years of age, that her age is a matter of guess and the view taken by the jury at one stage had been that at any rate she was not more than 14 years. the learned judge under the circumstances merely because the accused denied the whole story directed the jury that because the plea of consent has not been taken by the accused they need not determine whether the girl was below 14 or above 14 and they need not determine whether she consented or not. the learned judge was entirely mistaken in his position. he ought to have told the jury that the burden was on the prosecution to prove, in addition to the jactum of sexual intercourse, that the girl was below 14 or else that the accused committed that act against her will or without her consent. that being the whole gist of the offence, unless there is evidence sufficient to satisfy the jury of the circumstances that the girl was not consenting, the jury were not entitled to convict him at ail. it appears to mee that the charge as given to the jury is erroneous on fundamental points of law. the man has been given 5 years' rigorous imprisonment upon that charge. it is not possible for as to allow the conviction to stand.2. the appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence are set aside and we direct that the accused be retried. he may remain on the same bail as before subject to any order of the sessions judge.ameer ali, j.3. i agree.

Full Judgment

Rankin, C.J.

1. In my opinion this appeal succeeds. The case was that the accused caught hold of and committed rape on a girl who, according to the medical evidence, would appear to have had sexual intercourse before. The medical evidence is somewhat indeterminate and the learned Judge himself says on the question of the age of the girl that it was in no way proved that the girl was under 14 years of age, that her age is a matter of guess and the view taken by the jury at one stage had been that at any rate she was not more than 14 years. The learned Judge under the circumstances merely because the accused denied the whole story directed the jury that because the plea of consent has not been taken by the accused they need not determine whether the girl was below 14 or above 14 and they need not determine whether she consented or not. The learned Judge was entirely mistaken in his position. He ought to have told the Jury that the burden was on the prosecution to prove, in addition to the jactum of sexual intercourse, that the girl was below 14 or else that the accused committed that act against her will or without her consent. That being the whole gist of the offence, unless there is evidence sufficient to satisfy the Jury of the circumstances that the girl was not consenting, the Jury were not entitled to convict him at ail. It appears to mee that the charge as given to the Jury is erroneous on fundamental points of law. The man has been given 5 years' rigorous imprisonment upon that charge. It is not possible for as to allow the conviction to stand.

2. The appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence are set aside and we direct that the accused be retried. He may remain on the same bail as before subject to any order of the Sessions Judge.

Ameer Ali, J.

3. I agree.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial