Advanced Search Results

Just Rights For Children Alliance Vs. S. Harish

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Right to Information

morals and therefore has committed a cognizable offense under Section 67 (B) IT ACT & 15 (1) of the POCSO Act 2012. [...].” B. IMPUGNED ORDER9 Aggrieved by the aforesaid, the respondent No.1 went before the High Court of Judicature … a punishment for publishing or transmitting the material depicting children in Criminal Appeal Nos. 2161-2162 of 2024 Page 46 of 199 Sexually explicit act, etc., in an electronic form. If the basic ingredient of Section 67-B, prima

Yusuf, vs State of Kerala,

Court : Kerala

Section 7, and 10 r/w Section 9(l)(m) f the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (in short, ‘the POCSO Act’),2012. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.01.2024.2. The gist of the prosecution case is

Gaya Prasad Pal @ Mukesh vs.state

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

the punishment it was awarding, further directed as under :-"―COMPENSATION U/SEC. 7 POCSO RULES, 2012 Section 33(8) of POCSO Act, 2012 provides that in appropriate cases, compensation may be prescribed to the child. Rule 7(2) of POCSO Rules, 2012 … Section 376(2) IPC shall mean and be enforced as imprisonment for the remainder of Crl. A. No.538/2016 Page 46 of 72 his natural life, the question of directing any of the sentences to run consecutively is rendered

State Of Karnataka By Vs. Gireesh

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

and she was a minor and she comes under the definition of “child” as per the provisions of POCSO Act 2012.46. In this case, PWs-1, 2, 11, 12, and 15 are material witnesses. Other witnesses, who are related to … Shri P Nataraju, Advocate for R3 to R6; R7 is served) 3 Crl.A.No.873/2017 This Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(1) and (3) of Cr.P.C. praying to grant leave to appeal against the judgment and order of acquittal

Ravi @ Dhanapal vs the State Rep by

Court : Chennai

of conviction and sentence in Spl.S.C.No.46 of 2021 dated 16.03.2023 on the file of learned Special Judge under the POCSO Act, 2012, Puducherry and allow the Criminal Appeal as against the appellant.For Appellant: M/s.P.Pandiyaraj For Respondent: Mr.M.V.Ramachandra Murthy Public Prosecutor … By The Inspector of Police, Mettupalayam Police Station, Puducherry. Cr.No.36 of 2021. ..Respondent Prayer: Criminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, to set aside the Judgment of conviction and sentence in Spl.S.C.No.46 of

Yallappa Vs. The State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi

Subject : Criminal

fine, he shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. Further acting under section 33(8) of the POCSO Act, 2012 and according to the guideline NO.12 of NALSA’s compensation Scheme for Women Victims/Survivors of Sexual Assault/Other Crimes, 2018, … girl was with him. After taking food, accused and victim girl came out of the house. Accused - 46 - NC:2023. KHC-K:3808 CRL.A No.200069 of 2020 C/W CRL.RC.NO.200001 of 2020 took her to the canal bund behind

State Of Karnataka Vs. Kiran S/o Mailareppa Dandennavar

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

Subject : Education

376 of IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘the POCSO Act, 2012’) and secured the presence of accused for trial. The accused pleaded not guilty of the charges. The prosecution … trial. The accused pleaded not guilty of the charges. The prosecution examined P.W.1 to 22, marked Ex.P.1 to 46 and M.O.1 to 11. The accused was questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. On behalf of accused one

Rajesh Rameshchandra Sharma vs Union of India and Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

as protection of victims of sexual offences under Section 228A IPC, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.UNION OF INDIA / MINISTRY OF ELECTRONICS &INFORMATION … respondents further submit that the principle of open justice permitsSignature Not Verified W.P.(C) 1021/2016 & Connected Matters Page 46 of 144fair and accurate reporting of court proceedings and judicial decisions and that any direction restraining publication of

Dr. Ishwarprasad Gilada vs Union of India and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

as protection of victims of sexual offences under Section 228A IPC, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.UNION OF INDIA / MINISTRY OF ELECTRONICS &INFORMATION … respondents further submit that the principle of open justice permitsSignature Not Verified W.P.(C) 1021/2016 & Connected Matters Page 46 of 144fair and accurate reporting of court proceedings and judicial decisions and that any direction restraining publication of

Sanjeev Sehgal vs Union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

as protection of victims of sexual offences under Section 228A IPC, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.UNION OF INDIA / MINISTRY OF ELECTRONICS &INFORMATION … respondents further submit that the principle of open justice permitsSignature Not Verified W.P.(C) 1021/2016 & Connected Matters Page 46 of 144fair and accurate reporting of court proceedings and judicial decisions and that any direction restraining publication of