Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23218 of 2018 Applicant :- Gulab Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kant Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as also perused the record.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the order dated 05.02.2018, cognizance order dated 29.01.2018 and the entire proceeding of Special Case No. 12 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 395 of 2017, under Sections- 376, 452, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station- Jiyanpur, District- Azamgarh, pending in the court of Addl.District Judge, court No.6, Azamgarh.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present prosecution suffers from grave and serious infirmities, inasmuch as the offence alleged being with reference to a victim who is 16 years of age, looking into the nature of the offence alleged, the FIR could have been lodged in accordance with Section 19 of the Act No. 32 of 2012. Second, it has been submitted that the statement of the victim and other witnesses etc. could have been recorded only in accordance with Chapter VI of the aforesaid Act. Third, it has been submitted that by virtue of language of Section 19 of the aforesaid Act read with Section 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the FIR could not have been lodged under the Cr.P.C. and the charge sheet could not have been submitted thereunder and the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance on such a charge sheet.
The aforesaid argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant appears to be completely misconceived in view of the provisions of Section 42A of Act No. 32 of 2012, which make it clear that the provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other Act. Then the provisions of Section 19, 24 and other such provisions of the Act appear to have been incorporated to the benefit of the victim and not the accused. As such he does not appeal to reason that the FIR that has been lodged under the Cr.P.C. and the prosecution that has arisen thereon suffers from any grave or other error.
In view of the above, the instant application lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.7.2018 Lbm/-