Allowed

State of Chhattisgarh v. Mukesh Dewar @ Koshan

Chhattisgarh HC15 Jul 2019CRMP/1006/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh initially condoned an 83-day delay in filing an application for leave to appeal by the State. It subsequently dismissed a pending acquittal challenge against the accused, holding that the trial court's failure to examine the minor prosecutrix before acquittal was a fatal flaw warranting a fresh appeal registration.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal allowed; acquittal quashed; regular appeal registered.

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Mukesh Dewar @… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

CRMP No. 1006 of 2019

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶5

CRMP No. 1006 of 2019

¶6

State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Chuikhadan, Crime No. 115/2018, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.

¶7

---- Applicant

¶8

Versus

¶9

Mukesh Dewar @ Koshan S/o Taren Dewar Aged About 25 Years, R/o Amanaka Kukurbeda, Trimurti Square, Raipur, Police Station Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

---- Respondent

¶11

For Applicant/State

¶12

:- Shri K.K. Singh, GA

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Gautam Chourdiya, JJ. Order on Board By

¶15

Prashant Kumar Mishra, J

¶16

15/07/2019

¶17

Heard learned State counsel on I.A. No. 1 as also on admission.

¶18

I.A. No.1 of 2019

¶19

This is an application for condonation of delay in filing the application seeking leave to appeal.

¶20

On due consideration, application is allowed and delay of 83

¶21

¶22

CRMP No. 1006 of 2019

¶23

days in filing the application is condoned.

¶24

Accordingly, I.A. stands allowed.

¶25

The trial Court has acquitted the accused without examining the minor prosecutrix or her parents. Perusal of the order sheet of the trial Court would demonstrate that the trial Court did not make proper efforts to serve the summons on the witnesses. We are not happy with the proceedings drawn by the trial Court while acquitting the accused of the charges under Sections 363, 366, 376 (2)(j)(n) of IPC and Section 6 for violation of Section 5 (ठ) of Protection of Children from Sexual offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.

¶26

In these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the leave to appeal prayed by the State deserves to be and is hereby allowed.

¶27

Let regular acquittal appeal be registered and notice thereof be sent to the accused on payment of process fee within 3 days.

¶28

Post the acquittal appeal for hearing on admission in the next week. Copy of this order be sent to Smt. Dhaneshwari Sidar, the then Additional Sessions Judge, Khairagarh.

¶29

Sd/Sd/(Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Gautam Chourdiya) Judge Judge

¶30

Ankit

State of Chhattisgarh v. Mukesh Dewar @ Koshan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Chhattisgarh v. Mukesh Dewar @ Koshan

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

Similar cases

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Santosh Kumar and Anr.

Manendra Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanjay Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gulab Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Fulsai

The State of Chhattisgarh Vs Mahesh Kumar Kushwaha