Abhishekh @ Bikku vs State Of U.P. And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 10760 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 86
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1733 of 2020
 

 
Revisionist :- Abhishekh @ Bikku
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Revisionist :- Hari Bans Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lalit Singh Tomar
 

 
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

Learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for opposite parties are present.

The present criminal revision has been moved against the impugned order dated 17.1.2020 passed by learned VIIIth Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act) Kanpur Dehat, in S.S.T. No. 57 of 2019, (State Vs. Abhishekh @ Bikku and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 152 of 2018 under Section 376, 496, 386, 507 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Mangalpur, District- Kanpur Dehat. By the impugned order discharge application moved by the revisionist has been rejected.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.

Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that as there was love affairs between the revisionist and daughter of opposite party no.2/victim, they married at a temple and had also appeared before Civil Court Aurriya and obtained notary marriage agreement; that the alleged incident is said to be taken place on 1.10.2015 but F.I.R. whereof has been lodged on 22.5.2018, and no offence is made out against the revisionist but same has not been considered by the Court below while deciding the discharge application, therefore, the impugned order is illegal, bad in law and liable to be set-aside.

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has supported the impugned order and submitted that the Court below after appreciating the evidence has rightly passed the impugned order there is no illegality.

The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has fully supported her earlier statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The Court below relying upon the evidence and statements of the victim has rightly rejected the discharge application. Therefore, I do not find any manifest error, illegality, procedural or otherwise, so as to justify interference in criminal revision.

In view of above, the revision lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.

Accordingly revision is dismissed.

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

Certify this judgment to the lower Court immediately.

Order Date :- 24.8.2021

S.Verma