SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sonu @ Rajneesh Tiwari And 2 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 15 May, 2019

HIGHCOURTOFJUDICATUREATALLAHABAD

RESERVEDON07.02.2019

DELIVEREDON15.5.2019

AFR

Case:-CRIMINALMISC.482APPLICATIONNo.2897of2019.

Applicant:- [email protected]Tiwariand2others.

OppositeParty:-StateofU.P.andanother.

CounselfortheApplicant:-DharmendraSinghal,

SanjayChaturvedi,

ShivendraRajSinghal.

CounselforOppositeParty:-G.A.

Hon’bleRahulChaturvediJ.

1.

HeardShriDharmendraSinghal,learnedCounsel,assistedbySriShivendraRajSinghalandSriSanjayChaturvedi,learnedA.G.A.fortheState,perusedtherecord.

2.Ontheearlieroccasioni.e.on07.02.19,thematterwasheardatlengthandaninterimorderwasgrantedinfavouroftheapplicants,whichisoperationaltilldate.

3.Afterhavingheardrivalsubmissionsofthelearnedcounselforthecontestingparties,aconsensuswasarrivedatbetweenthemthatthematterbeheardattheadmissionstageitselfwithoutanycounterversionfromtheopponent.Hencethecaseisbeingadjudicatedanddecidedattheadmissionstageitself.

4.TheprayersoughtbymeansofpresentCriminalMisc.ApplicationfiledunderSectionsection482Cr.P.C.istoset-asideimpugnedjudgementandorderdated11.01.2019passedbyI-AdditionalSessionsJudge,BalliainS.S.T.No.527/2017aswellasS.S.T.No.186/2018([email protected]),wherebychargeswereframedundersectionsunderSectionsections354D(2)I.P.C.and11/12ofProtectionofChildrenfromSexualOffencesActagainstapplicantnos.1and2([email protected])andthechargesframedU/s147,148,302r/w149and506SectionI.P.C.andU/s354D(2)SectionI.P.C.and11/12ProtectionofChildrenfromSexualOffencesActagainstapplicantno.3([email protected])aswellastosetasideorderdated14.01.2019directingtheapplicantstosurrenderandseekbailundertheaforesaidrespectingSectionsections354D(2)IPCandU/s11/12POCSOActonthefollowingsgrounds:

(i)thechargesaredefectiveoneand

(ii)framingofthechargevideorderdated11.01.2019isdehorstotheearlierjudgmentofthiscourtdated31.05.2018whiledecidingtheCriminalMisc.ApplicationU/s482SectionCr.P.C.No.19724/2018andthereafteranotherjudgmentdated2.7.2018whileadjudicatinganddecidingtheCriminalMisc.ApplicationU/s482SectionCr.P.C.No.22130/2018.

5.ThisCourthasrespectfullyperusedthejudgmentspassedbymypredecessorsdecidingboththeaforesaidCriminalMisc.Applicationsandfindsthatbytheorderorderdated31.05.2018gavedirectiontothecourtbelow,whichisherebyextractedhereinbelow:

“….IntheconsideredopinionofthisCourt,chargesnos.5and6,asframed,arerequiredtobequashedandframedafreshbytheTrialCourtonthenextdatefixedinaccordancewiththerequirementofSection212Cr.P.C.withagoodenoughdescriptionofthedate,timeandplaceofoccurrenceaswouldgivetheaccusedsufficientnotice,occasionandopportunitytomeetthosecharges.

18.Intheresult,thisapplicationisallowedinpart.Theimpugnedorderdated22.05.2018(AnnexureNo.14totheaffidavitfiledinsupportoftheapplication)insofarasitrelatestochargesnos.5and6areherebyquashed.TheTrialCourtisdirectedtoreframethesaidchargesonthenextdatefixed,orassoonasmaybe,inaccordancewithwhathasbeensaidinthisjudgment.Theorderimpugnedassailingrefusaltodischargeandthatquestioningtheotherchargesframedvideorderdated22.05.2018areupheld.

6.Perusaloftherecordrevealsthatvideorderdated02.07.2018passedinApplicationu/s482No.22130of2018bycoordinateBenchofthisCourt,thematterwasconcludedafterhearingcontestingpartiesonmerits.Itwouldbepertinenttoreproducetherelevantextractoftheaforesaidorderhereinbelow:

“….Havingheardthelearnedcounselfortheparties,nousefulpurposewouldbeservedinkeepingtheapplicationpendingespeciallyinviewofthefactthattheargumentsoadvancedbylearnedcounselfortheapplicantsappearstohavealreadybeenacceptedbythisCourtvideitsorderdated31.5.2018.Merelybecausetheword”schoolkhulnekebadavamdinaank8.8.2017kepurva”havebeenaddeditcannotbesaidthattheeithertheplaceorthetimeorthedateoftheincidenthasbeendisclosed.

Infactevenintheoriginalorderdated22.5.2018asimilardescriptionhadbeenmadeinchargenos.5and6whereinthelearnedcourtbelowhadobserved”Uproktatithiavamsamaykepurva”thisreferencewasclearlytothedate8.8.2017,whichhadbeenspecifiedinchargeno.1andwithwhichthereisnodispute.

Therefore,thesubmissionadvancedbylearnedcounselfortheapplicantthatthecourtbelowhascommitteditselftothesameerrorashadcreptintheorderdated22.5.2018hastobeacceptedinasmuchasotherthanre-framingofthesentencethedefectnoticedbythisCourtinitsorderdated31.5.2018hasyetnotbeenaddressed.

Theorderdated18.6.2018isherebysetasideandthematterisremittedtothelearnedcourtbelowtocomplywiththeorderdated31.5.2018passedbythisCourtin482SectionCr.P.C.ApplicationNo.19724of2018.

Itisexpectedthatthelearnedcourtbelowshallcomplywiththeaforesaidorderinletterandinspiritandnotseekformalcomplianceforthesame.Theaforesaidexercisemaybecompletedasexpeditiouslyaspossible.

Inviewoftheaforesaiddirections,theapplicationisdisposedof.”

7.Butwhenthematterwasnotdisposedofbythecourtbelowtothesatisfactionoftheapplicants,thepresentCriminalMisc.Applicationhasbeenfiled,assailingtheorderdated11.01.2019bythetrialcourtwherebyfreshchargeshavebeenframed.

8.Beforearrivingtolegalaspectoftheissue,ascanvassedbylearnedcounselfortheapplicants,itwouldbeimperativetogiveskeletonofthefactsforappreciationoftheentirecontroversyinvolvedinthematter.

(a) On08.08.2017at9.30A.M.,oneJitendraKumarDubeylodgedanFIRfortheincidentsaidtohaveoccurredonthesamedayat7.30hoursfortheallegedincidentofmurderbynamedaccusedpersonsi.e.(1)PrinceTiwari(2)KripaShankerTiwari(3)SonuTiwari(4)NeerajTiwariand(5)RajuYadav,whichwasregisteredasCaseCrimeNo.1128/2017atPoliceStationBanshdihRoad,DistrictBalliawiththeallegationthatinformant’sdaughter,RagniDubey,astudentofClass-XII,thenamedaforesaidaccusedpersonsusedtoindecentlyteaseherbymakingderogatoryandfilthyremarks,whilegoingtoherschoolontheway.Oftentheytriedtocrossheightsofindecencybyphysicallymishandlingher.Humiliatedbysuchabehaviouroftheaccusedpersons,shecomplainedthemattertoherfathermanyatimes,whotriedtorestrainthehooligans.Onthefatefulday,i.e.on8.8.2017at7.30hours,whendaughteroftheinformantwasgoingtoschoolonherbicycleandreachednearKaliTemple,thenamedaccusedmiscreantssurroundedherontheirrespectivemotorcycles,dashedthecycleofthevictimandthereafterallofthemcaughtholdthegirl,manhandledher.OneoftheaccusedSonuTiwaripulledherhairandtheotherPrincieTiwari,withintentionofkill,assaulteduponthegirlbyaknife,causingseriousandgrievousinjury.Thisincidentwaswitnessedbyinformant’swifeSmt.VandanaDubey,SunilSinghandotherpersonsofthelocality.Aftertheoccurrence,allofthemtooktotheirheelsfromthesiteandthegirlwastakentothehospitalwhereshetookherlastbreath.Abloodstainedknifewasrecoveredfrompointingoutofco-accusedPrinceTiwari.

(b)Perusalofthepostmortemreportofthedeceased;RagniDubeyrevealsthatthedeceasedreceivedthreeinjuriesoverherperson.Thefirstinjurywasincisedwoundwithclear-cutmargins3.5x1cmxdeepfacialdepthextendingbetweenmidlineontheneckandthelowermarginofleftmandiblerunningobliquely.Thesecondinjurywasincisedwoundmeasuring4cmx1.5cmxdeepfacialdepthonleftsideofneck1cmbelowinjuryno.1.Thethirdinjurywasofincisedwoundof8.0cmx6.5cmxmuscledeeponbothsideofneck9cmabovesternuminvolvingdeepissuesofneckwithgapingofmarginofwouldandthiswoundwasdeeperontherightside.ontheleftsideoftheneck,1.00c.m.belowtheinjuryno.1andthethirdinjuryisincisedwoundonboththesidesofneck,9c.m.abovesternuminvolvingdeeptissuesoftheneck.

9.Duringcourseofarguments,thelearnedcounselofapplicants,himself,leavingallothersubmissionsaside,stresseduponthechargesframedU/s354-ASectionIPCandU/s7/8ofProtectionofChildrenFromSexualOffencesActandcompletelyfocusedupontheorderofrefusaltodischargeapplicationdated22.05.2018.

10.ItiscontendedbythelearnedcounselfortheapplicantsthatthechargesframedU/s354ASectionIPCand7/8oftheProtectionofChildrenFromSexualOffencesActarenotinconsonancewiththemandateprovidedinSection212ofCodeofCriminalProcedure,whichreadsthus:-

Section212oftheCriminalProcedureCode

Particularsastotime,placeandperson

1.Thechargeshallcontainsuchparticularsastothetimeandplaceoftheallegedoffence,andtheperson(ifany)againstwhom,orthething(ifany)inrespectofwhich,itwascommitted,asarereasonablysufficienttogivetheaccusednoticeofthematterwithwhichheischarged.

2.Whentheaccusedischargedwithcriminalbreachoftrustordishonestmisappropriationofmoneyorothermoveableproperty,itshallbesufficienttospecifythegrosssumor,asthecasemaybe,describedthemovablepropertyinrespectofwhichtheoffenceisallegedtohavebeencommitted,andthedatesbetweenwhichtheoffenceisallegedtohavebeencommitted,withoutspecifyingparticularitemsorexactdates,andthechargesoframedshallbedeemedtobeachargeofoneoffencewithinthemeaningofSectionsection219:

Providedthatthetimeincludedbetweenthefirstandlastofsuchdatesshallnotexceedoneyear.

11.ThelearnedcounselfortheapplicantsassailedthosechargesonthegroundthatSection211/Section212Cr.P.C.speaksaboutfurnishingtheparticularsastothetime/placeandpersonandonthispremisesitwaschallengedthatchargesareframedwithouttheaforesaidessentialparticularsandithasbeenvaguelydescribedasthesamedonotgivenoticetotheaccusedoftheoffenceforwhichtheytheyhavebeencharged.TheearliercoordinateBencheshaveappreciatedtheargumentsandwereoftheopinionthatthiskindofvaguedescriptionofdate,timeofoccurrenceisfarfromthemandateofSection212Cr.P.C.,whichisrequiredessentially,therefore,theimpugnedorderdated22.05.2018sofarasitrelatestochargenos.5and6arequashedandthetrialcourtwasredirectedtoframethechargesafresh.

12.Afterreceiptoftheaforesaidorder,thechargewerereframedon18.6.2018whichagaincomebeforethisCourtbymeansofCriminalMisc.ApplicationNo.22130/2018andvideorderdated2.7.2018theopinionofmypredecessorwasthatthecourtbelowhascommittedthesameerrorasearlieroneandexceptbymakingcosmeticchangeinmakingthechargei.e.”mijksDrfrfFk,oale;dsiwoZ”wasaddedandthesecondtimealsotheorderdated8.6.18wasset-asideandmatterwasremittedonceagaintocomplywiththeorderdated31.5.18whiledecidingtheCriminalMisc.ApplicationNo.19724/2018afresh.Matterwasagainremittedbackandconsequentlyvideorderdated12.6.18thelearnedIstAddl.SessionsJudgewhiledroppingthechargesU/s5oftheProtectionofChildrenFromSexualOffencesActwasdroppedbythethenI-AddionalSessionsJudge,Balliaandthereaftermatterwasreopenedforframingfreshcharge.Atthisstage,itispertinenttobringonrecordthestatementsoftheinformantaswelltheothereyewitnessesrecordedunderSectionsection161Cr.P.C.,whohavemadeunambiguoussubmissions.Itispertinenttomentionherethatthereiscategoricalallegationofeve-teasingandassaultuponawomenwithintenttooutragehermodestyintheFIRitself.13.13.ThereisspecificallegationintheFIRthattheseaccusedpersonsquiteoftenusedtoteasethegirlbyextendingfilthyandabusivelanguage,passedderogatoryremarksandsometimestheytriedtogetphysicaltoo.Besidesthis,onthefatefuldaywhenshewasgoingtoherschoolbyherbicycleat7.30inthemorning.Shewassorroundbyallofthemandthereaftershewasmercilesslybutcheredbytheapplicants.Therelevantportionofthe161SectionCr.P.C.statementoftheinformantisquotedhereinbelow:-

eSalsuklslsokfuo`RrgwarFkkdSUVhucfy;kesadk;Zjrgwa]esjhyMdhjkfxuhnqcslaLdkjHkkjrhlkdsriqjesad{kk12dhNkkFkhesjhyMdhjkfxuhnqcsdksLdwytkrsle;ovkrsle;xkaodsfizUlfrokjhiqd`ik’kadjfrokjh]lksuwfrokjhiqckys’ojfrokjh]uhjtfrokjhiqpUnzeufrokjh]jktw;knoiqjkepUnj;knoNsM+[kkuhocksyckthdjrsjgrsFksftldhf’kdk;resjhyMdhjkfxuhnqcsuseqlsfd;kFkkeSusbldkmykgukd`ik’kadjouhjtojktw;knolksuwfrokjhds?kjokyslsfd;kFkkoksmuyksxkaausdgkFkkfdgevkvksviuhyMdhdkslekvksatksgkseSans[kywaxkAesjsmykguknsusls;syksxeqlsoesjhcsVhjkfxuhlsdkQhukjktjgusyxsFksA

14.Onsimilarlines,thestatementsunderSectionsection161Cr.P.C.ofthemotherofdeceased,Smt.VandanaDubeyandNehaDubeywerealsorecorded.Theyalsostatedthereinthatonthefatefuldayat7.30inthemorning,whendeceasedwenttoherschoolonherbicycle,nearKaliMandirallthenamedaccusedpersonsontheirrespectivemotorcyclessurroundedherandaccusedPrinceTiwaridashedthebicycleofthegirl,consequentlyshefelldownwhereuponSonuTiwarimanhandled,restoftheaccusedpersonscaughtholdofherandPrinceTiwarihasgivenfatalblowbyhisknifeonherneck.ThesaidknifewasrecoveredfromthepointingoutofPrinceTiwari.

15.Afterremittingthemattertwicebythiscourt,theI-AdditionalSessionJu[email protected]AdityaTiwariU/s354D(2)SectionI.P.C.andundersection11/12ofthePOCSOActasChargeNo.5and6respectively,maintainingrestofsectionsSectionoftheIndianPenalCodei.e.U/s147,148,302/149,[email protected],chargeno.1wasframedU/s354D(2)SectionIPCand11/12oftheProtectionofChildrenFromSexualOffencesAct.SofarasPrinceTiwariisconcerned,chargeU/s4/25SectionArmsActwasalsoframedafterrecoveryofknifefromhispointingoutandusingthesameforcommissionoftheoffence.IntheaforesaidcontextitwouldbepertinenttogothroughSection354D(2)I.P.C.,onceagainwhichreadsthus:-

354D.Stalking-(1)Anymanwho-

(i)followsawomanandcontacts,orattemptstocontactsuchwomantofosterpersonalinteractionrepeatedlydespiteaclearindicationofdisinterestbysuchwoman;or

(ii)monitorstheusebyawomanoftheinternet,emailoranyotherformofelectroniccommunication,

commitstheoffenceofstalking.

(2)Whoevercommitstheoffenceofstalkingshallbepunishedonfirstconvictionwithimprisonmentofeitherdescriptionforatermwhichmayextendtothreeyearsandshallalsobeliabletofine;andbepunishedonasecondorsubsequentconviction,withimprisonmentofeitherdescriptionforatermwhichmayextendtofiveyearsandshallalsobeliabletofine.”

16.Thusfromtheaforementionedfactsandcircumstances,itisquiteclearthatintheinstantcase,theaccusedpersonswerechargedforfollowingthedeceased,tryingtomakecontactwithhertofosterpersonalinteractionrepeatedlydespiteofherclearindicationofserenenesstowardstheaccusedpersons.ItisevidentfromthestatementsrecordedunderSectionsection161Cr.P.C.oftheinformant,motherofthegirlandotherwitnessesthatthedeceasedwasonconstanttargetofaccusedpersonsofwhichsherepeatedlymadecomplaintstoherfather.

17.SubmissionmadebythelearnedcounselfortheapplicantsthatchargesframedarenotinconsonancewiththemandatelaiddownunderSectionsection212Cr.P.Casitprovidesthatanaccusedpersonisentitledtoknowwithcertaintyandaccuracytheexactnatureofchargebroughtagainsthim.Unlesshehastheknowledgeinthisregardhisdefencewouldbeseriouslyseriouslyprejudicedandmarred.However,whereitisnotpossiblefortheprosecutiontomentiontheparticularspreciously,havingregardtothenatureoftheinformationavailabletotheprosecution,failuretomentionsuchparticulars,wouldnotinvalidatethecharge.Sub-Section2ofSection212SectionCr.P.C.isanexceptiontomeetcertaincontingenciesandisexceptiontothenormalrulesetupunderSectionsection218ofCr.P.C.andthusSection212Cr.P.C.shouldnotbereadinexclusion.Section215Cr.P.C.providestheaffectsoftheerror,ifatall.Section215Cr.P.C.isintendedtopreventanyfailureofjusticefornon-compliancewiththemattersrequirestobestatedinthecharge.Unlesstheirregularityinthechargehasmisleadtheaccusedoroccasionedamiscarriageofjustice,theconvictioncannotbeset-aside.Omissionofdateofoccurrenceinthechargehadofnoconsequence.Committalinmarkingthemistakeintimingoftheoccurrenceinthechargeisnotfatal.

18.InthecelebratedjudgmentofHon’bleApexCourtintheCaseofWillie(William)SlaneyVs.StateofMadhyaPradeshAIR1956SCPage116,theConstitutionalBenchofHon’bleApexCourthasexplainedtheconceptof”prejudicecausedtotheaccused”and”failureofjustice”andheldasunder:

“5.BeforeweproceedtosetoutouranswerandexaminetheprovisionsSectionoftheCode,wewillpausetoobservethatSectiontheCodeisacodeofprocedureand,likeallprocedurallaws,isdesignedtofurthertheendsofjusticeandnottofrustratethembyanintroductionofendlesstechnicalities.TheobjectSectionoftheCodeistoensurethatanaccusedpersongetsafullandfairtrialalongcertainwell-establishedandwell-understoodlinesthataccordwithournotionsofnaturaljustice.

Ifhedoes,ifheistriedbyacompetentcourt,ifheistoldandclearlyunderstandsthenatureoftheoffenceforwhichheisbeingtried,ifthecaseagainsthimisfullyandfairlyexplainedtohimandheisaffordedafullandfairopportunityofdefendinghimself,then,providedthereissubstantial’compliancewiththeoutwardformsofthelaw,meremistakesinprocedure,mereinconsequentialerrorsandomissionsinthetrialareregardedasvenalbySectiontheCodeandthetrialisnotvitiatedunlesstheaccusedcanshowsubstantialprejudice.ThatbroadlyspeakingisthebasicprincipleonwhichSectiontheCodeisbased.

19.FollowingtheConstitutionalBenchintheWillie(William(SlaneyVs.StateofMadhyaPradesh’scase,thethreeJudgesBenchofHon’bleApexCourtintheCaseofGuruBachanSinghVS.StateofPunjabAIR(1957)SC636observedthatthecourtisnotlookingintotechnicalitiesbuttothesubstanceandheldthat:-

“……. injudgingaquestionofprejudice,asaguilt,courtsmustactwithabroadvisionandlooktothesubstanceandnottotechnicalities,andtheirmainconcernshouldbetoseewhethertheaccusedhadafairtrial,whetherheknewwhathewasbeingtriedfor,whetherthemainfactssoughttobeestablishedagainsthimwereexplainedtohimfairlyandclearlyandwhetherhewasgivenafullandfairchancetodefendhimself…..”

20.ThefailureofjusticehasbeenrecentlyexplainedinyetanotherjudgmentofHon’bleApexCourtinthecaseofMainPalVS.StateofHariyana2010(3)SCC(Crl.)1234andafterthrashingtheprincipleswhicharereiteratedinseveraldecisionsofHon’bleApexCourtincludingStateofWestBengal.Vs.LaisalHaq(1989)SCC(Crl)513,StateofAndhraPradeshVs.ThakkiDiramReddy1998SCC(Crl.)1488,DalvirSinghVs.StateofU.P.(2004)SCC(Crl.)1592andSanicharSahaniVs.StateofBihar(2009)(7)SCC198,thefollowingprinciplesrelatingtoSectionsection212,Section215andSection464oftheCodeofCriminalProcedure,whicharerelevantintheinstantcasearesummarizehereinbelow:-

(i)Theobjectofframingachargeistoenableanaccusedtohaveaclearideaofwhatheisbeingtriedforandoftheessentialfactsthathehastomeet.Thechargemustalsocontaintheparticularsofdate,time,placeandpersonagainstwhomtheoffencewascommitted,assarereasonablysufficienttogivetheaccusednoticeofthematterwithwhichheischarged.

(ii)Theaccusedisentitledtoknowwithcertaintyandaccuracy,theexactnatureofthechargeagainsthim,andunlesshehassuchknowledge,hisdefencewillbeprejudiced.Whereanaccusedischargedwithhavingcommittedoffenceagainstonepersonbutontheevidenceled,heisconvictedforcommittingoffenceagainstanotherperson,withoutachargebeingframedinrespectofit,theaccusedwillbeprejudiced,resultinginafailureofjustice.Buttherewillbenoprejudiceorfailureofjusticewheretherewasanerrorinthechargeandtheaccusedwasawareoftheerror.Suchknowledgecanbeinferredfromthedefence,thatis,ifthedefenceoftheaccusedshowedthathewasdefendinghimselfagainsttherealandactualchargeandnottheerroneouscharge.

(iii)Injudgingaquestionofprejudice,asofguilt,thecourtsmustactwithabroadvisionandlooktothesubstanceandnottothetechnicalities,andtheirmainconcernshouldbetoseewhethertheaccusedhadafairtrial,whetherheknewwhathewasbeingtriedfor,whetherthemainfactsshouldtobeestablishedagainsthimwereexplainedtohimfairlyandclearly,andwhetherhewasgivenafullandfairchancetodefendhimself(underliningadded).

21.IntherecentdecisionenunciatedinthecaseofDarbaraSinghVs.StateofPunjab[(2012)(10)SCCPage476],theHon’bleApexCourtconsideredsimilarissueandheldthattheaccusedhastosatisfythecourtthatifthereisanydefectinframingthechargewhichhasprejudicedthecauseoftheaccused,resultinginthefatalofthejustice.Itisonlyinthateventualitythecourtmayinterfere.

22.OntheaforesaidparameterslaiddownbyHon’bletheApexCourtinplethoraofjudgmentswheresimilarcontroversywasadjudicatedasisinthepresentcasewherechargeunderSectionsection354D(2)[email protected],onsolegroundoftheallegationsthat”on8thAgust,2017around7.30a.m.nearKaliMandirsituateatWajahan,Balliahehasfollowedthedeceasedandattemptedtocontacthertofostertheinteractionrepeatedlydespiteoftheclearindicationbyher,herdisinterestandtherefore,thisactiononthepartofaccusedpersonprimafaciefallswithintherealmsofoffenceU/s354D(2)SectionCr.P.C.”ThisfactachievedsubstantialcorroborationfromthestatementsrecordedunderSectionsection161Cr.P.C.ofthefather/informantwiththetextoftheFIRwhereintheallegationareinconsonancewiththestatementsrecordedunderSectionsection161Cr.P.C.ofVandanaDubeyandNehaDubey,whoareeyewitnessesoftheincident.Notonlythis,onthedateofincidentitself,PrinceTiwarisonofKripaShankerTiwariassistedtheteamofthepoliceinprocuringbloodstainedknifeonhisownpointingoutfromanagriculturalfield,belongingtooneRamNarainChaubey,sonofParamHansChaubeyandresidentofNawaNagar,BasdeehRoad,Ballia.

23.Nowthequestionfallingforconsiderationisastowhetherintheabsenceofanymateriali.e.timeandplaceofincidentwhileframingthechargeU/s354ASectionI.P.C.,wouldamounttofailureofjusticetotheaccusedpersons.Itisrelevanttoexaminewhethertheaccusedpersonswereawareaboutthebasicingredientsoftheoffenceforwhichtheyarebeingprosecuted,whethertheyareexplainedtohimandwhethertheyhavegotfairchancetodefend.ThechargesframedbythelearnedI-AdditionalSessionsJudgeareasfollows:-

CHARGE:

Dated:11.01.2019.

I,NarendraSingh,IstAddl.SessionsJudge,Ballia,herebychargeyouPrinceTiwarialiasAdityaTiwariasfollows:-

1……..

2……..

3………

4……….

5.Thatyou,onthe08thdayofAugust,2017atabout7.30a.m.nearKaliMandirsituatedatVillageWazhan,PSBansdihRoad,DistrictBalliafollowedthevictimandattemptedtocontacthertofosterpersonalinteractionrepeatedlydespiteaclearindicationofherdisinterestandtherebycommittedanoffenceofstalkingpunishableunderSectionsection354D(2)oftheIndianPenalCodeandwithinthecognizanceofthiscourt.

6.Thatyou,onthe08thdayofAugust,2017,atabout7.30a.m.,nearKaliMandirsituatedatVillageWazhan,P.S.BansdihRoad,DistrictBalliarepeatedlyandconstantlyfollowedthevictim,aminorgirlandtherebycommittedanoffenceofsexualharassmentpunishableU/s12readwithS.11ofPOCSOAct,andwithinthecognizanceofthiscourt.

24.Fromtherecord,itisborneoutthatthedeceasedRagniDubeywaspursuingherClassXIIstudiesandasperherHighSchoolCertificate,herrecordeddateofbirthwas22.03.2002.Thedateofincidentis08.08.2017andthereforeonthedateofincident,heragewaslesserthan18yearsandshewassubjectmatterofoffence,mentionedinSection11ofProtectionofChildrenfromSexualOffenceActwhichdefinessexualharassmentuponachild.Intheinstantcasealsothevictimgirlwasonaconstanttargetofteasingbytheselarikinsbytheiruglyutterances/remarksandrepulsivesignals,gesturesandoftentheserecalcitrantstrytoturnphysicaltowardsthepoorvictimgirl.AlltheseallegationsareevidentfromtheFIRaswellasthestatementsunderSectionsection161Cr.P.C.oftheinformantaswellasofthewitnesses.

25.ItwasfurtherarguedbythecounselfortheapplicantthatthechargesarevagueoneandinabsenceoftimeanddateofoffencepunishableunderSectionsection354I.P.C.wouldcauseseriousprejudicetotheaccused/applicants.Thisargument,iftestedonthegroundrealities,isnotpossiblebecauseitisnotpracticallypossibletoprepareachart,time,durationbeforewhomthoseoffencesweremadeortheword/suttered.Itisnotpracticallypossibletoprovideeachandeverydetailatthetimeofframingofchargeandthusthiscourtisfailstoaccepttheaforesaidargumentplacedbylearnedcounselfortheapplicants.

26.Insumandsubstance,takingtheguidelinesofHon’bleApexCourtandevaluatingthesamewiththefactsandcircumstancesofthepresentcase,thiscourtdonotfindanyillegality/irregularity/improprietyorperversityintheorderimpugneddated11.01.2019andtheorderrejectingtheapplication,holdingthatappreciationofevidenceavailablefromthestatementsofthewitnessesaswellasdocuments,includingtheinjuries,thepostmortemreportofthedeceasedandotherrelevantmaterials,itappearsthatprimafaciecaseismadeoutagainsttheoffendersnamely;KripaShankerTiwari,[email protected],[email protected],andNeerajTiwari,whowereinvolvedintheoffencesU/s147,148,302/149,354DSectionIPCandSection12readwith11ofthePOCSOAct,accordinglythechargeswereframedagainsttheaccusedpersons.

27.However,theordersupplementedtherebymakinganadditionofSection354DI.P.C.andSection11/Section12ProtectionofChildrenfromSexualOffencesActagainstKripaShankerTiwari,itisgiventounderstandthattheaccusedpersonshavenotsoughtbailintheaddedsections;theyarerequiredtosurrenderandgetthemselvesbailedoutwithinaperiodofonemonthfromtoday.

28.ThepresentCriminalMisc.ApplicationU/s482SectionCr.P.C.sansmeritandtherefore,dismissed.Theinterimorder,grantedearlier,standdischarged.

OrderDate:-15.5.2019

shailesh

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation