X Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision has been filed challenging the order dated 14. 06.2022 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO Act), Balod, District Balod in Special Sessions Case No.50/2022 for adding the charge under Sec. 5 (n) of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short "the POCSO Act") in Crime No.270/2022, P.S Gurur, District Balod as the offence has been committed by the relative of the victim.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that as Non-Applicant No.2 is the son of the maternal uncle of the victim, therefore, the charge under Sec. 5 (n) of the Act is also attracted and prays to allow the Petition with a direction to the concerned Court for altering the charge accordingly.

(3.) Per contra, Shri Thakur, learned Counsel for the State/Non-Applicant No.1 supports the contention of learned Counsel for the Applicant but Shri Shrivastava, learned Counsel for Non-Applicant No.2 opposed the prayer while submitting that the order is interlocutory in nature and no blood sample has been collected during the investigation which shows that Non-Applicant No.2 is the relative of the victim, therefore, no interference is required and the Revision is liable to be dismissed.