Page No. 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 8 June, 2021

[Cites 13, Cited by 0]

Gauhati High Court

Page No. 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 8 June, 2021

Bench: Manish Choudhury

                                                                     Page No. 1/4

GAHC010080822021




                       THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                           Case No. : Crl.Pet./326/2021

         RAJIB GHOSH AND 2 ORS.
         S/O. SRI HARADHAN GHOSH, R/O. SRIPURIA, TINGRAI HABI, P.O. AND P.S.
         TINSUKIA, DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM.

         2: LAXMAN SWAMI
          S/O. SURYA PRAKASH SWAMI
          R/O. JALAJI MARBLE
          EYE HOSPITAL BUILDING
          MAKUM ROAD TINSUKIA
          P.O. AND P.S. TINSUKIA
          DIST. TINSUKIA
         ASSAM.

         3: RAKESH SHARMA
          S/O. LT. BISHESHWAR DAYAL SHARMA
          R/O. MAKUM ROAD
          NEAR OVERBRIDGE
          P.O. AND P.S. TINSUKIA
          DIST. TINSUKIA
         ASSAM

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
         REP. BY PP, ASSAM.

         2:RAM NATH SINGH
          S/O. SRI KAILASH SINGH
          R/O. MAKUM ROAD
          NEAR UCO BANK
          P.O. AND P.S. TINSUKIA
          DIST. TINSUKIA
         ASSAM
          PIN-786125
                                                                        Page No. 2/4


Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR Z KAMAR

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                    BEFORE
                   HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

                                          ORDER

08.06.2021 The Court proceedings have been conducted through remote video conferencing mode due to the prevailing situation in the State due to Covid-19 pandemic.

2. Heard Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 1, State of Assam.

3. The petitioners by this criminal petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973 have sought for setting aside and quashing of the impugned order dated 19.12.2018 (Annexure-5) passed by the learned Special Judge, Tinsukia in POCSO Case no. 52(T)/2018 and the entire proceedings of POCSO Case no. 52(T)/2018 pending before the said Court. By the said order dated 19.12.2018, the learned Special Court had taken cognizance for the offence under Section 22 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and also under Sections 323/324/34, Indian Penal Code (IPC) against 7 (seven) nos. of persons including the present 3 (three) accused-petitioners and issued process for their appearance.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Page No. 3/4 cognizance under Section 22 of the POCSO Act could not have been taken by the Court as it has not been established that a false complaint or false information has been made against the respondent no. 2. He has further submitted that the genesis of the said order is one First Information Report (FIR) lodged by the respondent no. 2 on 19.09.2018, which was registered as Tinsukia Police Station Case no. 1210/2018 for offences under Sections 120B/341/323/307, IPC read with Section 22(3) of the POCSO Act and the said FIR, learned senior counsel submits, is a counter blast to an FIR lodged against the respondent no. 2 by one Sabina Begum on 18.09.2018, registered as Tinsukia Police Station Case no. 1202/2018 under Section 8, POCSO Act. A charge sheet has already been submitted in Tinsukia Police Station Case no. 1202/2018 against the respondent no. 2 on 07.11.2018 finding a prima facie case for the offence under Section 12, POCSO Act and accordingly, POCSO Case no. 51(T)/2018 has been registered.

5. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable in 4 (four) weeks.

6. The scanned copies of the records of POCSO Case no. 52(T)/2018 and concerned case diary along with a status report be requisitioned from the Court of Special Judge, Tinsukia.

7. As Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has accepted notice on behalf of the respondent no. 1, no formal notice needs to be issued to the respondent no. 1. Learned counsel assisting Mr. Kamar shall, however, serve an extra copy of the petition along with the annexures to Mr. Baruah within 3 (three) days.

8. The petitioner shall take fresh steps for service of notice on respondent no. 2 by way of registered post with A/D within 7 (seven) days from today.

Page No. 4/4

9. The prayer for interim order will be considered on the returnable date.

10. This order be brought to the notice of the Registrar (Judicial) for doing the needful from his end.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gauhati High Court