Disposed

Sachin Alias Sachin Kumar and Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024A482/877/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interim order under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court stayed the operation of a summoning order and criminal proceedings involving rape and POCSO charges. The court directed the opposite party to file a counter affidavit and issued notice before the matter is decided. No substantive ruling on the merits was made.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the operation of the summoning order dated 20.11.2023 and entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 151/2023 interimly pending hearing.

Sachin Alias Sachin Kumar and Others vs the State of U.P… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 877 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Sachin Alias Sachin Kumar And Others Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Abhishek Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Gyanendra Singh, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of the summoning order dated 20.11.2023 as well as the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 151/2023, under Sections 376, 504 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Machhrehta, District Sitapur pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge14/POCSO Act, Sitapur.

¶7

The opposite party no. 2 had filed an application dated 22.06.2023 under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the applicants and Chet Ram, father of applicant nos. 1 & 3, alleging that when the complainant's daughter had gone to attend the call of nature at about 06:30 p.m. on 24.05.2023 in a sugarcane field, the applicant nos. 1 & 2 dragged her in the sugarcane field, the applicant raped her while threatening her with a weapon and he also molested her. When the complainant's daughter raised a hue and cry, the complainant's mother, another daughter and some villagers reached on the spot while while shouting but the accused persons ran away.

¶8

On 23.06.2023, the court passed an order for registering the application as a complaint.

¶9

In the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C., he reiterated the complaint's version. The alleged victim also supported the complaint case in her statement recorded under Section 202 Cr.P.C.

¶10

Although it is stated in the complaint and in the statements recorded under Sections 200 & 202 Cr.P.C. that the alleged victim's grandmother-Sarla Devi, sister-Roshni Devi and several other persons had reached on the spot, none of them were produced for recording statement under Section 202

¶11

Cr.P.C. There is no medical evidence also to support the allegations.

¶12

7 The learned counsel for the applicants submitted that there is a dispute regarding passage between the parties, regarding which proceedings under Sections 151/ 107/ 116 Cr.P.C. were initiated on 28.05.2023. The complaint has been lodged soon thereafter a false allegation due to the aforesaid reason. The complaint is the vexatious and it is a gross abuse of the process of law.

¶13

The matter requires consideration.

¶14

Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2 returnable at an early date.

¶15

The opposite parties may file counter affidavit within four weeks. Rejoinder affidavit within two weeks thereafter.

¶16

List in the week commencing 01.04.2024.

¶17

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, it is provided that till the next date of listing, the further operation of summoning order dated 20.11.2023 as well as the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 151/2023, under Sections 376, 504 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Machhrehta, District Sitapur pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge14/POCSO Act, Sitapur, shall remain stayed.

¶18

Order Date :- 9.2.2024 Pradeep/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sachin Alias Sachin Kumar and Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Alias Sachin Kumar and Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kammo Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 6 Others

Suhel vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. and 4 Others

Vijay Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Amit Kumar Singh @ Amit Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another

Vinay Kumar @ Vinay Kumar Saxena and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

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