Dismissed

Dr. Ram Vinod Jha v. The Central Govt. Of India Through Its Legal And Judicial Secretary, At New Delhi and Ors.

Patna HC7 Jan 2019CR. MISC./47064/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a criminal miscellaneous petition challenging the addition of a charge under Section 4 of the POCSO Act. Despite documentary evidence indicating the victim was a minor, the court acknowledged her status as a minor justified the charge, finding the petition inherently deficient.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed on the ground of inherent deficiency.

Dr. Ram Vinod Jha Vs The Central Govt. Of India… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.47064 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2013 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi

¶3

====================================================== Dr. Ram Vinod Jha, S/o Late Sadanand Jha, R/o village+P.O.-Tilak Tajpur, P.S-Runni Saidpur, District-Sitamarhi, Pin Code-843316, Mob.9801792596.

¶4

. ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Central Govt. Of India Through Its Legal And Judicial Secretary, At New Delhi & Ors

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dr. Ram Vinod Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sri Pranav Kumar ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER

¶9

5 07-01-2019

¶10

Heard the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶11

Though, no statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim has been attached with the instant petition but, during course of argument the petitioner himself disclosed that the victim had stated before the Magistrate to the effect that after having been carried by her Mama to the place of the petitioner where she stayed, petitioner had developed physical intimacy with her.

¶12

Petitioner has submitted that from the medical evidence her age has been estimated as 20 years. The medical evidence also did not suggest the factum of penetration and that being so, addition of charge is non-permissible in the eye of law.

¶13

The learned Additional P.P. opposed the prayer.

¶14

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47064 of 2018(5) dt.07-01-2019 2/2

¶15

For the present, the age of the victim as disclosed under matriculation certificate being 20.01.1997 is to be considered and further, acknowledging the status of the victim to be minor did justify addition of charge under 4 of the POCSO Act and that being so, instant petition suffers from inherent deficiency whereupon, is dismissed.

¶16

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)

¶17

Prakash Narayan U T

Dr. Ram Vinod Jha v. The Central Govt. Of India Through Its Legal And Judicial Secretary, At New Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Ram Vinod Jha v. The Central Govt. Of India Through Its Legal And Judicial Secretary, At New Delhi and Ors.

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

Gautam Rajbhar Vs The State Of Bihar

Indrajeet Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar

Shambhu Sharma and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Ashok Roy and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Amit Kumar Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Chatish Mandal and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar