Allahabad High Court
Sachin Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 11 August, 2021
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 49 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10224 of 2021 Applicant :- Sachin Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vipul Shukla Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
1. Heard Sri V.P. Mishra, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Vikas Goswami, learned AGA for the State and Sri Vipul Shukla, learned counsel for private respondents.
2. This petition has been filed by the co-accused seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 22.12.2020 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur in Criminal Case No. 2504084 of 2020 (State vs. Vipin Kumar @ Vikky and Another) arising out of Case No. 169 of 2020, under Section 509 IPC, Police Station-Roza, District-Shahjahanpur.
3. Sri V.P. Mishra submits that only allegation against the present applicant is of threatening the prosecutrix to malin her image in the society in case, she decides to take any action against co-accused-Vipin Kumar @ Vikky. It is submitted that none of the ingredients of offence, so to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC, are available and therefore, this is a fit case to not only to quash the summoning order, but also the chargesheet and the final report.
4. Sri Vipul Shukla, in his turn, opposes the prayer for quashing.
5. Sri Vikas Goswami, in his turn, submits that the provisions of Section 509 IPC are wide enough to take within its sweep even intention of use of words or sound or gesture, so to intrude upon the privacy of such woman to make it punishable offence.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the available material, it is evident that in the FIR, there is a specific allegation that after co-accused-Vipin Kumar @ Vikky had refused to perform marriage with the victim, then present applicant-Sachin Kumar had sent a message through messenger that he has taken out complete bio-data of the victim and he shall cause harm to her reputation in the society if she decides to take any action against the co-accused-Vipin Kumar @ Vikky.
7. This material, prima facie, is sufficient to constitute an offence under Section 509 IPC, inasmuch as, under Section 509 IPC, it is mentioned that whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any words, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, and also with fine
8. In the present case, there is specific allegation and material available to show that there was intention on the part of the present applicant-Sachin Kumar to intrude upon the privacy of the victim by threatening her to expose her deeds with Vipin Kumar, of which, he was privy too in case, she decides to take any action against Vipin Kumar. Prima facie, this being sufficient to initiate proceedings against present applicant under Section 509 IPC. I do not fined any reason to quash the proceedings or the summoning order.
9. Accordingly, petition fails and is dismissed.
Order Date :- 11.8.2021 Vikram/-