Allahabad High Court
State Of U.P. vs Sachin S/O Bajrangi Alias Shyam ... on 4 October, 2023
Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Syed Aftab Rizvi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:190176-DB
Court No. - 46
Case :- GOVERNMENT APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 295 of 2023
Appellant :- State of U.P.
Respondent :- Sachin S/O Bajrangi Alias Shyam Katiyar
Counsel for Appellant :- Ashutosh Kumar Sand
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.
Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.
Ref:- Order on Delay Condonation Application
The delay in filing of the appeal has been explained to the satisfaction of the Court and is otherwise not seriously opposed.
The delay condonation application is allowed.
Ref:- Appeal
This appeal is by State alongwith an application for grant of leave to challenge the judgment of acquittal dated 02.03.2022, passed by the court below in Session Trial No.914 of 2011 (State of U.P. Vs. Sachin), arising out of Case Crime No. 240 of 2011, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC, Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar.
Record reveals that missing report was lodged by the father of the victim, namely, P.W.-1 on 25.02.2011, as per which, his minor daughter has been enticed by the accused. The informant kept searching her daughter since 20.02.2011, and ultimately lodged the missing report as Case Crime No.240 of 2011, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. at Police Station- Kalyanpur, District- Kanpur Nagar. The investigation concluded with submission of charge-sheet, on which, cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and charges were framed against the accused on 29.03.2012, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C.
The prosecution case has been supported by the parents of the victim, who have appeared as P.W.-1 and P.W.-2, as per which, the age of the victim was 14 years. However, the victim herself has not supported the prosecution case, when she was produced in evidence as P.W.-4. The victim has been declared hostile on the request of the prosecution. As per the victim, she had voluntarily left with the accused and had also performed marriage in an Arya Samaj Temple with the accused.
So far as the age of the victim is concerned, she has been found to be 20 years of age in the radiological report, which is duly proved. The parents of the victim, however, have relied upon the school records, in order to contend that she is a minor.
We have carefully examined the evidence on the aspect of age of the victim. P.W.-6 has been produced, as the Principal of the Institution, where the victim was admitted to class 6th on the basis of transfer certificate issued by the primary school at Simoor. No records relating to the primary institution has been produced. Law with regard to determination of age, on the basis of transfer certificate, has been recently considered by the Supreme Court in P. Yuvaprakash Vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 846, and the Court has clearly observed that determination of age on the basis of the transfer certificate would not be admissible in terms of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. In that view of the matter, we are inclined to endorse the view taken by the Court of Sessions that the victim, in fact, was major.
Since the victim has been found to be above 18 years of age and she, otherwise, has not supported the prosecution case, the conclusion drawn by the Court below to acquit the accused by granting him benefit of doubt would, thus, require no interference.
In such circumstances, we find that neither any triable issue is raised before us in this appeal nor any perversity is shown, which may persuade this Court to grant leave to assail the judgment of acquittal. Prayer made by the State for grant of leave is, accordingly, refused and the appeal, consequently, fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.10.2023
SP/-
