JAVED AKHTAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under section 482 CrPC has been moved by Javed Akhtar who has been summoned by Xth Addl Sessions Judge, Varanasi, on an application moved by the Public Prosecutor u/Sec. 319 CrPC, by bis order dated 13-1-1989.

(2.) ON 25-5-1987 Smt Laxmi Devi lodged a report at police station Chowk, Varanasi, that her daughter Seema aged aboutl3 or 14 years reading in class VII of Arya Mahila Inter College had been missing since the night between 24th and 25th May, 1987. She had stated in her report that Shahid, Naiyyar and Kanhaiya were seen by the neighbours moving around her house and they were suspected to have enticed away and kidnapped Km Seema. The police investigated the case and submitted a charge' sheet against the three accused persons mentioned above However on the basis of the evidence on record, the Public Prosecutor asked the court to summon applicant Javed Akhtar to stand his trial by Xth Addl. Sessions Judge as mentioned above. It is relevant to mention that in between, after the girl had been recovered on 26-5-1987, her statement u/Sec. 164 CrPC had been recorded when she was produced before the competent magistrate.

(3.) THE stand taken in this application was that the court below had erred in summoning the applicant u/Sec 319 CrPC as the applicant was a good citizen of the locality coming from a respectable family of Varanasi district and was also president of Vyapar Mandal, President District Cricket Association as also the Secretary of District Lok-Dal, Varanasi. It was further mentioned in the affidavit filed by the applicant in support of this application u/Sec- 482 CrPC, that there was enmity (with him) in political circle and the people of locality were jealous on account of his reputation and with a view to damage his reputation his enemies bad got the applicant falsely implicated in this case THE other ground for seeking interference by this court was that on investigation the investigating agency bad found no case whatsoever against the applicant; and in any case, no offence u/Secs. 363/366 Indian Penal Code was made out against the applicant.