Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC18 Dec 2024A482/10110/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in quashing proceedings notes a settlement between the victim and applicant but notes a continuous change in the prosecution story. The court does not quash the case but lists it for further hearing on 18.12.2024.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ranjeet vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10110 of 2024 Applicant :- Ranjeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Wajid Irfan,Al Saud Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saboor Khan,Yahya Ali

¶3

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶4

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned Counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶5

In pursuance of earlier order, parties are present before this Court.

¶6

Victim and complainant have categorically stated before this Court that due to some wrong impression, FIR of case in question was lodged and now they have arrived at a settlement, living peacefully in the village and victim is doing her further studies, therefore, they have no objection, in case, the proceeding against the applicant are dropped.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present application has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Sessions No.2195/2023 (State v/s Ranjeet), pending before Special Judge (POCSO ACT) III, Lucknow arising out charge-sheet no.01/2020 filed in case crime no. 0296/2020, u/s 354-A, 504, 506 I.P.C. u/s 7 and 8 of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offence Act (POCSO Act), 2012 and u/s 67B of Information TechnologyAmendment) Act, 2008, Police Station-Malihabad, District- Lucknow.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that family of victim and applicant were well known to each other and no mischief was done by the applicant to the victim. As there was some talk about the victim and applicant as well as other associates, as a result, family members of victim were annoyed. Therefore, FIR of case in question was lodged on the basis of exaggerated facts. He further submitted that during the course of investigation, statement of victim was recorded under section 161 as well as 164 CrPC and in her statement under section 161 CrPC, she made allegation of doing videography against six persons, but in the statement recorded under section 164 CrPC, allegation was made only against applicant. He further

¶10

submitted that no offence under the provisions of POCSO Act is made out, even then, the charge sheet was filed. He further submitted that the differences between the parties have already been resolved and they are residing in the same village peacefully. A settlement agreement has also been executed between the parties, therefore, the proceeding against the applicant may be quashed.

¶11

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer of applicant and submitted that after detailed investigation, charge sheet was submitted, therefore, proceeding cannot be quashed only on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶12

Learned Counsel for the complainant has also conceded the statement of learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that due to some misunderstanding, FIR of case in question was lodged. Now victim, complainant and applicant are residing peacefully in the village, therefore, they have no objection, in case, the proceeding against the applicant be dropped.

¶13

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of application, statement of victim and complainant as well as other relevant documents, as there is continuous change in the prosecution story, therefore matter requires consideration.

¶14

List this case on 18.12.2024.

¶15

In the meantime, learned AGA as well as learned Counsel for the complainant may file counter affidavit.

¶16

On the next date, parties shall again appear in person before this court.

¶17

Order Date :- 5.12.2024 V. Sinha

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ranjeet v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ziauddin Ahmad Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Navneet Bhadauria @ Navneet Bhadauriya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Juvenile X vs State of Up Others

Pinki and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

X- Juvenile vs State of Up and 3 Others

Ashok Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another