HANUMAN PRASAD AND ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

HANUMAN PRASAD AND ORS. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN

In the absence of evidence of common intention among the appellants to commit rape, their conviction under Section 376(2)(g) IPC cannot be sustained.

Parties
Appellants: Hanuman Prasad and Ors.; Respondent: State of Rajasthan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / From Appellate Judgment of Rajasthan High Court Against Acquittal by Trial Court
Outcome
Appeals allowed; conviction and sentence set aside.
Legal Topics
Rape, Common Intention, Section 376(2)(g) IPC
Criminal Law Rape Common Intention Section 376(2)(g) IPC

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hanuman Prasad and Ors.

Appellants

State of Rajasthan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / From Appellate Judgment of Rajasthan High Court Against Acquittal by Trial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether conviction under Section 376(2)(g) IPC can be sustained in absence of evidence showing common intention to commit rape.

Ratio Decidendi

In the absence of evidence of common intention among the appellants to commit rape, their conviction under Section 376(2)(g) IPC cannot be sustained.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; conviction and sentence set aside.

Orders

  • Appellants' bail bonds discharged.
  • Conviction and sentence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC set aside.