KRIPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Nirvikar Gupta, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Ishwar Chandra Tyagi, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. None responds from opposite party no. 2 despite sufficient personal service.

(2.) The revisionist, Kripal Singh, has preferred this criminal revision against the judgement and order dated 31.10.2013 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No. 16, Bulandshahar in Criminal Misc. Case No. 11 of 2013 in S.T. No. 401 of 2012 (State vs. Kripal) under section 376(G), 323 IPC and 4/6 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, Police Station Chhatari, District Bulandshahar whereby the application filed by revisionist to declare him juvenile, was rejected.

(3.) Brief facts of this case giving rise to this revision is that an FIR was lodged on 13.2.2012 by the father of the victim with the allegation that the daughter of the informant aged about 16 years had gone to ease in the field of maize of Jagdish and by that time the accused Bhupendra, son of Jagdish, Neeraj son of Ram Prasad, who are resident of his village, committed rape forcibly and after preparing the blue film published the same in the village.