Criminal court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a remand order. Held that the trial court had power to form an opinion on prima facie case under Section 376D IPC based on Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement, and no infirmity was found.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the remand order was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 65
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25553 of 2019
Applicant :- Salman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Ali Imam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 7.5.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, VI, Meerut in Case Crime No. 239 of 2019, P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut, whereby the learned Magistrate arbitrarily granted remand of the accused-applicant under Section 376D, 452 IPC.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the order dated 7.5.2019 remanding the accused under Section 376-D and 452 IPC is erroneous because in statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim had stated that she was raped by only Salman, while in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she had stated that she was raped by all the accused named in the F.I.R., therefore, despite the said discrepancy being on record the trial court had remanded the accused-applicant under the aforementioned sections, which is illegal.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned order.
I do not find any force in the argument of learned counsel for the applicant because it is well within power of the Magistrate while granting remand of the accused to peruse the evidence on record and form an opinion as to whether the remand is required to be given under Section 376D or only under Section 376 IPC. Since the trial court appears to have formed its opinion that prima facie case under Section 376D was made out as the victim had narrated in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that she was raped by all the five accused, the same cannot be said to be erroneous, hence I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order at this stage. Accordingly, application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
Order Date :- 1.7.2019 A.P. Pandey
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Magistrate erred in granting remand to the accused under Section 376D IPC despite a discrepancy in victim's statements.
Whether there was any infirmity in the order remanding the accused under Section 376D and 452 IPC.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Salman
State Of U.P.
Another
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
