Allahabad High Court
Smt. Ritu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 September, 2023
Bench: Subhash Chandra Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:181979
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2210 of 2022
Revisionist :- Smt. Ritu
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Revisionist :- Rajendra Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajeev Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Supplementary counter affidavit filed by learned counsel for the opposite party is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist through his father with a prayer to allow this revision and set aside the judgment and order dated 02.05.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO) Act, Gautam Buddh Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 2022, Prashant Vs. State arises out of Case Crime No. 677 of 2021 (Case No. 169 of 2021), under Sections 376, 384, 506, 328, 504 I.P.C. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Phase- 2, District Gautam Buddh Nagar.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist/ informant that in this case the opposite party was declared juvenile by the learned J.J. Board and thereafter an order under Section 15/ 18 of the Act was passed by the learned Board against which an appeal was filed before the learned court of Session which was transferred to the children's court for hearing and was disposed of on 02.05.2022 and the appeal was allowed but no opportunity of hearing was given to her and she was not impleaded as respondent in the appeal. She also indicated that she has filed copy of appeal memo which shows that she was not made a party, in this way, the order passed by the learned appellate court dated 02.05.2022 is illegal and cannot be said to be lawful, therefore, request to set aside the order and allow the present criminal revision.
Learned counsel for the opposite party as well as learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case though the revisionist was not impleaded as a party in the array of appeal but during the course of hearing of appeal notice was issued to her and she engaged learned counsel Sri Pandit C.P. Gautam who filed his Vakalatnama on 02.05.2022 and also given an opportunity of hearing thereafter, the order in question was passed by the learned appellate court, in this way it cannot be said that she was not given an opportunity of hearing during the course of hearing of appeal and order was passed. Certified copy of Vakalatnama of learned counsel for the revisionist has also been filed through supplementary counter affidavit.
Learned A.G.A. has also stated in the counter affidavit that notice was issued to the revisionist by the learned court of session, in this way, the order in question was passed after giving an opportunity of hearing to the revisionist and there is no any illegality in the order, therefore, the present revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission made by learned counsel for both the parties as well as learned A.G.A. for the State, perusal of record, and the order passed by learned appellate court, it appears that though the revisionist was not made party in the array of appeal memo but when case was transferred to the children's court for hearing by the learned Session's Judge notice was issued to the revisionist and she engaged her counsel as aforesaid who filed his Vakalatnama before the learned Court on 02.05.2022 as is evident from the certified copy of the Vakalatnama filed in criminal appeal No. 41 of 2022. In this way, it cannot be accepted that the revisionist was not given an opportunity of hearing in appeal and order was passed by the learned court. As a result, the submission made by learned counsel for the revisionist cannot be accepted as well but this criminal revision being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.9.2023
Suraj Srivastav
