Customers in Spa Centres : High Court Examines the Aspects of Criminal Law in the Allegations

Customers in Spa Centres : High Court Examines the Aspects of Criminal Law in the Allegations

In a case where there was allegation that a person visited Spa Centre and paid for services for consensual sex with a woman it was noted that person a customer who was involved consensually with one of the women at the spa, having paid for the services. The proceedings against such under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 were found to be unsustainable in law.

Vipul Kohli v. State of UP [2025] GCtR 1899 (Allahabad) 

Conspiracy and Criminal Law

 Conspiracy and Criminal Law

Many Judgments were given by Hon'ble Supreme Court.

It has been commented at page 8, 9 of Gulam Sarbar v State of Bihar (now Jharkhand) [2013] GCtR 2714 (SC) thus : -

"The essential ingredients of criminal conspiracy are (i) an agreement between two or more persons; (ii) agreement must relate to doing or causing to be done either (a) an illegal act; or (b) an act which is not illegal in itself but is done by illegal means. What is, therefore, necessary is to show meeting of minds of two or more persons for doing or causing to be done an illegal act or an act by illegal means. Mere knowledge or discussion or generation of a crime in the mind of the accused, is not sufficient to constitute an offence. The offence takes place with the meeting of minds even if nothing further is done. It is an offence independent of other offences and punishable separately. Thus, the prosecution is required to establish the offence by applying the same legal principles which are otherwise applicable for the purpose of proving criminal misconduct on the part of an accused. Criminal conspiracy is generally hatched in secrecy thus direct evidence is difficult to obtain or access. The offence can be proved by adducing circumstantial evidence or by necessary implication. Meeting of minds to form a criminal conspiracy has to be proved by adducing substantive evidence in cases where circumstantial evidence is incomplete or vague. The gist of the offence of conspiracy then lies, not in doing the act, or effecting the purpose for which the conspiracy is formed, nor in attempting to do them between the parties. Agreement is essential.”

Kindly note that full text Judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court can be downloaded absolutely free of cost from the official website at the link https://main.sci.gov.in/judgments - Then entering the date of Judgment for example as 7 October 2013.

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. 

Crime of Suicide by Abetment : Some Legal Issues

 Suicide by Abetment : Some Legal Issues

Many cases have been decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court.

In context of Section 306 of IPC, it has been commented at page 3 of M. Arjunan v State [2018] GCtR 2701 (SC) thus : - 

"The essential ingredients of the offence under Section 306 IPC are: (i) the abetment; (ii) the intention of the accused to aid or instigate or abet the deceased to commit suicide. The act of the accused, however, insulting the deceased by using abusive language will not, by itself, constitute the abetment of suicide. There should be evidence capable of suggesting that the accused intended by such act to instigate the deceased to commit suicide. Unless the ingredients of instigation/abetment to commit suicide are satisfied the accused cannot be convicted under Section 306 IPC."

Kindly note that full text Judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court can be downloaded absolutely free of cost from the official website at the link https://main.sci.gov.in/judgments - Then entering the date of Judgment (for example) as 4 December 2018.

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction.  

"When and if there is intent and knowledge, then the same would be a case of S. 304 Part I" of IPC, 1860 : Delhi High Court

There are several Judgments dealing with S.304 Part I of IPC. 

It has been held at page 24 of its Judgment by Hon'ble Delhi High Court that "when and if there is intent and knowledge, then the same would be a case of Section 304 Part I and if it is only a case of knowledge and not the intention to cause murder and bodily injury, then the same would be a case of Section 304." 

In this case, the facts were such that victim was "stabbed". Weapon used was "churra (knife)". The victim was a male and was "young". The victim was a businessman [kirana shop related business]. The accused was also a male and it was argued by accused that "accused was aged 25 years" on date of offence."

Here in such cases, it was needed to know [at page 9] "whether the prosecution has succeeded to prove that the injury caused by the [accused] was with intention of causing such bodily injury, which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death and therefore, falls under clause thirdly of Section 300 IPC."

For details refer citation Tayyab v State NCTD [2013] GCtR 946 (Delhi).