AKHILESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Narendra Gupta, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri Ajay Srivastava, learned counsel for the State. None for complainant-respondent no.2 though served.

(2.) Present revision has been filed against the order dated 25.10.2017 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sitapur in Criminal Appeal No.61 of 2017, dismissing the appeal preferred by the revisionist assailing the order dated 14.9.2017 passed by Juvenile Justice Board, Sitapur, arising out of Crime No.227 of 2017, under Sections 341,342,312,313,376 of IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Sidhauli, District Sitapur.

(3.) Facts of the instant case, in brief, are that on 2.6.2017, FIR was lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix, alleging in it that when her daughter had gone to fetch water from the hand pump, she was taken by the wife of one Chander to the house of the revisionist; the door was bolted from outside and then the revisionist committed rape on the prosecutrix. After about half an hour, door was opened by the wife of Chander, who asked the prosecutrix not to disclose the incident to any one. It is stated that thereafter, whenever her daughter used to fetch water, the revisionist used to commit rape on her and when 17 days prior to 2.2.2017, prosecutrix disclosed the fact to the revisionist that she is pregnant, the revisionist with the help of one Harish Chandra gave certain medicines to the prosecutrix, resulting her abortion. She states that since then the prosecutrix was subjected to threat by the accused persons. Based on this FIR, offence under Sections 341,342,312,313,376,504,506 of IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act was registered against the revisionist and other accused persons.