Dismissed

Uvaiz Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2024A482/27815/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment heard a Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition challenging the framing of charges for rape. The court held that the victim's Section 164 statement corroborated FIR allegations, rendering the petitioner's claims of belatedness and enmity matters for trial evidence rather than grounds for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands dismissed; notice to opposite party No.2 dispensed with.

Uvaiz Khan vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:163239

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27815 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Uvaiz Khan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikrant Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.G.A. for opposite party No.1. In view of order being passed, notice to opposite party No.2 stands dispensed with.

¶7

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging order dated 31st May, 2024 passed in Session Trial No. 75 of 2023, State versus Uvaiz and others arising out of case crime No. 115 of 2022, under Sections 452, 376, 323 and 506 IPC, P.S. Bilaspur, District Rampur.

¶8

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that by means of impugned order, charges have been framed against petitioner who was named in the first information report as having committed rape upon the victim.

¶9

Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted and drawn attention to various documents on record to indicate previous enmity between the parties and submits that present the F.I.R. is a direct result of such previous enmity. He has also submitted that the allegations levelled in first information report are in variance with the application under Section 156 Cr.P.C. which was lodged by the husband of the victim and does not anywhere mention the aspect of any rape having been committed. He has also submitted that the victim has not appeared before the court for deposing with regard to her statement. He has also submitted that the F.I.R. even otherwise is highly belated and clearly indicates afterthought at the behest of the victim and her family and is clearly indicative of false implication of petitioner in the charges levelled against him.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner with submission that statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. clearly corroborates the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. and has therefore opposed the petition.

¶11

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that statement of victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and appears to corroborate the allegations levelled in the first information report. The application under Section 156 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the husband of victim and may have lower degree of evidence with regard to statement of the victim.

¶12

Submissions so made by learned counsel for petitioner are subject matter of evidence which would be led before trial court since charges have already been framed.

¶13

In view of aforesaid, this court does not find any occasion to interfere with the order impugned. The petition therefore stands dismissed.

¶14

Order Date :- 15.10.2024 Prabhat

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Uvaiz Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uvaiz Khan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Brij Kishor Prasad Rana Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secretary Secondary Edu. and Ors.

Amar Nath Yadav Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Communication and 2 Others

Yogesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Social Welfare Lko and 3 Others

Nihal vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramesh Chandra Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Krishi Vipran and Videsh Vyapar ANUBAGH-1, Lko. and 3 Others

Seema Srivastava and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Dept. of Culture and others