Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1524 of 2019 Applicant :- Chandrapal Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Kumar Yadav,Ajeet Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to set-aside the impugned judgment and order dated 2.8.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bareilly in Session Trial No. 50 of 2014 (State Vs. Ravi) arising out of Case Crime No. 338 of 2013, under Sections 366, 342 I.P.C., Police Station Aliganj, District Bareilly.
Opposite Party no. 2 has lodged an F.I.R. against the applicant- accused Kamal Mourya, on the allegations that Kamal Mourya has abducted her daughter Kiran Sheel. After investigation, Police submitted the charge-sheet against one Ravi.
In the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim has not taken the name of the applicant, she has stated that she was taken by one Ravi.
In the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. for the first time the victim has taken the name of the applicants and further stated that while returning back from the school, accused-applicants had given food (Prasad) to the victim and the victim after eating the food (Prasad), became unconscious, thereafter, they put the victim in van and took her to NOIDA, where she was locked in a house. The victim further stated that she was told by the applicants that she has been sold to one Ravi.
On the basis of the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the opposite party no. 2 filed an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning the applicants. The application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is allowed by the court below by order dated 02.08.2018, and the court below has summoned the accused-applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that there was no allegations against the applicants in the F.I.R. and, further, after recovery of the victim, the victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has not taken the name of the applicants nor there was any allegations against the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants further contended that only in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. under pressure, victim has taken the name of the applicants and, the allegations against the applicants have surfaced for the first time in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
The submission is that due to enmity with the applicants the name of the applicants have been taken by the victim girl only with an intention to harass the applicants.
In that view of the matter, applicants are permitted to move discharge application through counsel before the trial Court within one month from today and the trial court shall decide the same within a period of three months from the date of filing of application along with certified copy of this order.
For a period of there months or till the disposal of discharge application whichever is earlier, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants.
However, in case discharge application is rejected, the applicants are at liberty to appear and surrender before the Courts below within three weeks thereafter and apply for bail. Their bail applications shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57) ALR-290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) after hearing the Public Prosecutor in the aforesaid crime number for the aforesaid offences.
With the aforesaid observations, this application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 Ishan