Court No. - 65
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29326 of 2019 Applicant :- Abhishek Kumar Saxena (Minor) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Alkesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Alkesh Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been moved with a prayer to quash the order dated 15.07.2019 framing of charge in Case Crime No. 54 of 2019 under section 452, 376, 506 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Jalaun, District Jalaun, pending in the Court of Additional Session Judge Court No. 1/POCSO Act, Jalaun at Urai and also a prayer is made to stay the proceedings in this case till the disposal of this application.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the date of the occurrence has not been mentioned in the impugned charge which has been framed against the accused-applicant vide order dated 15.7.2019. Therefore, the said charge is erroneous which needs to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing of the charge stating that there was sufficient evidence on record to frame charge against the accused. There is no infirmity in the judgment.
I rely on the judgment of Supreme in the case of Soma Chakravarty vs. State through CBI (2007) 5 SCC 403, it has been laid down in this case by Supreme Court for framing charge, the relevant consideration is that if on the basis of material on record the court comes to form an opinion that the commission of offence by the accused was possible, it would not be required to be seen as to whether accused had committed the offence, because the same would be decided only at the trial. At the time of framing of the charges the probative value of the material on record cannot be gone into. The said material has to be accepted as true.
Nothing such could be shown by the learned counsel for the applicant that there was no evidence at all against the accused-applicant to the effect that one month prior to 14.2.2019 the accused had tried to commit rape upon the victim after entering into her house and gave threat to kill her. I do not find an infirmity at this stage in the impugned order.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of the aforesaid case is refused. The application u/s 482 deserves to be rejected and is accordingly rejected. Order Date :- 30.7.2019 AU