DAYARAM YADAV (VAKIL) Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

(2.) The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant for quashing the impugned charge sheet no. 19 of 2020 dated 01.02.2020 in Case No. 296 of 2020 (State vs. Dayaram), Case Crime No. 133 of 2019, under Sections 452, 504, 506, 376, 511 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sakrauli, District Etah, pending in the Court of Special Sessions Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Etah.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village rivalry; he has committed no offence. He further submitted that initially the F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 354, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v) S.C./S.T. Act, but later on, on the basis of statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the case was converted under Sections 376 and 511 I.P.C. After investigation charge sheet was submitted under the aforesaid sections. It is further contended that accused-applicant is practising Advocate. The incident is said to have taken place in the house of victim that is not a public view. There is no public witness of the incident. He further argued that there is material difference in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of victim and F.I.R. lodged by her regarding the date of incident. He next submitted that there is no medical report supporting the prosecution case. He showed some papers and statements in favour of his contention.