Madhya Pradesh High Court
Hameer Singh Narwariya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 20 July, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
Bench: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 20 th OF JULY, 2023
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1708 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
HAMEER SINGH NARWARIYA S/O SHRI BHAGWAN
SINGH NARWARIYA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O KAVI
NAGAR, PINTO PARK, BHIND ROAD, GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI SURENDRA SINGH NARWARIYA- ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
POLICE STATION GWALIOR DISTT. GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. PR OS ECUTR IX THROUGH POLICE STATION
G WA L I O R R/O VILLAGE BHAGEDI POLICE
STATION DABOH DISTT BHIND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PRAMOD PACHAURI- PUBLIC PROSECUTOR FOR THE STATE
BY SHRI KAMLESH KUMAR KORI- ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)
Th is revision coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Present criminal revision under Section 397 r/w Section 401 of CrPC has been filed by petitioner -Hameer Singh Narwariya being aggrieved by order dated 16.9.2022 passed by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, in Signature Not Verified S.T.No.332/2022 whereby charges under Sections 376(1) and 506 Part II of Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD IPC have been framed against the petitioner.
Signing time: 20-07-2023 05:59:38 PM 2 In brief facts of the case are that on 24.1.2021 at 8 pm prosecutrix aged about 21 years lodged a written complaint at police Station Gwalior alleging that she is resident of Bhadhedi, police Station Daboh, Distt. Bhind and she is residing in rented accommodation along with his brother in Gole Ka Mandir. She is working in J.S. Motor, Pinto Park. On 25-26.12.2020 she received a call on her mobile and the caller introduced himself as petitioner Hameer Singh Narwariya and enquired about her job, then she replied that she is working in J.S.Motors, on which petitioner told that she has started Nitya M.P. Online and if she will join, he will pay her Rs.20,000/- per month. On 13.1.2021 she reached at the address provided by the petitioner, then petitioner showed her his office and when she went in another room, petitioner closed the latch of the door and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of giving job to her. Thereafter he threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone, otherwise he will viral her video. Thereafter on 24.1.2021 she lodged the report. On her report, crime 43/2021 has been registered at police Station Gwalior, Distt. Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 506 of IPC. She was sent for medical examination. No internal or external injury has been found on her person. Thereafter her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded before the Magistrate on 6.2.2021 in which she has stated that she is aged about 23 years and working in J.S. Motors, Pinto Park. There was some dispute with regard to her salary with her boss, and therefore, she had gone to police Station Kila Gate to lodge the report. She does not know the name of her boss who is known as Sir. In reply to the question as to whether she knows petitioner Hameer Singh Narwariya, she replied that she used to call him as Sir Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD and she denied that petitioner has committed any rape with her and gave any Signing time: 20-07-2023 05:59:38 PM threatening to kill her. Afterwards concerning Investigating Officer filed an 3 application before the Superintendent of Police, Gwalior, that as per the investigation, it is found that prosecutrix has lodged false report against the petitioner, and therefore, permission for filing expunge report may be granted and a complaint under Section 182, 211 against the prosecutrix may be preferred before the Court. But thereafter charge-sheet has been filed in the matter and charges as aforesaid has been framed against the petitioner. In the bail application preferred by the petitioner she has also filed an affidavit through her counsel Shri Prateek Singh Kirar that petitioner has not committed any rape with her and only a hot talk took place. Annoyed with this, she went to lodge the report.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the copy of charge- sheet.
From the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in the considered opinion of this Court, when prosecutrix who is aged 23 years has herself denied the allegation of rape and threatening in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate, learned Court below has erred in framing the charges under Section 376(1) and 506 Part II of IPC against the petitioner. Accordingly, order dated 16.9.2022 framing charge for the aforesaid offences against the petitioner is set aside and petitioner is discharged. This revision is accordingly allowed.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL) JUDGE ms/-
Signature Not Verified Signed by: MADHU SOODAN PRASAD Signing time: 20-07-2023 05:59:38 PM