This is Special Criminal Miscellaneous petition challenging an order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding the refusal to summon additional accused. The High Court found the petition devoid of merit regarding an exaggerated version of events and dismissed the plea.
The petition was dismissed as it was found to be devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1641/2018
Harshita Rathore Through Her Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Krishna Kanwar, W/o Shri Govind Singh, Ag , R/o Ward No.10, Vill And P.o. Badagaon, Ps Gudha Gorji, District Jhunjhunu, Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rohit Kumar Verma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakash Thakuriya PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
-/Order/-
16/08/2018
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to assail the order dated 13.12.2017 passed by the court of Special Judge The Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Matters Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, whereby he refused to summon Prakash Chand and Kanchan Meena as additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has read the statement of petitioner recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
A perusal of the statement reveals that the prosecutrix was constantly having telephonic conversation with principal accused Vijay @ Pintu. She alongwith principal accused left the house on Scooty of Prakash Chand, sought to be summoned as an additional accused. The prosecutrix travelled with the principal accused Vijay @ Pintu in public transport and visited public places.
(2 of 2)
[CRLMP-1641/2018]
It is urged that the prosecutrix later alongwith principal accused had stayed at the house of Kanchan Meena.
The investigating agency after thorough investigation came to the conclusion that no offence has been committed by Prakash Chand and Kanchan Meena.
Considering that the prosecutrix travelled with the principal accused in public transport and had visited public places and was having long telephonic conversation with principal accused Vijay @ Pintu, it is apparent that at subsequent stage due to consultations and deliberations, an exaggerated version was unfolded to widen the net.
The order passed by the court below suffers from no infirmity. The trial court has rightly observed that from the evidence on record, chances of conviction of Prakash Chand and Kanchan Meena are bleak. The view formulated by the trial court is one view which is possible on the facts and circumstances of the case. Hence, no interference is warranted and the present petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J
Mak/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the trial court erred in not adding Prakash Chand and Kanchan Meena as additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Harshita Rathore Through Her Natural Guardian Mother Smt. Krishna Kanwar
State Of Rajasthan
Kanwalsingh Ahluwalia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
