HIMANSHU GANDHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order dtd. 23/9/2021 passed by learned 23rd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in ST No.10/2021 whereby charges for offences punishable under Ss. 354, 354-A (1) (i), 354-D and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 9 (l)(m)/10 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, have been framed against the applicant.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel has challenged the impugned order framing charges on many grounds. The applicant and the prosecutrix are neighbours and there is enmity between the parties and the applicant had earlier made complaints against the mother of the prosecutrix due to neighbourhood disputes. It is contended, inter alia, that the mother of the minor prosecutrix deliberately refused for her medical examination. It is vehemently contended that there is no ingredients for framing charges under Ss. 504, 354 and 354D of the IPC. Learned Senior Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to Sec. 3 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and contends that no ingredients as provided in Sec. 3 of the Act which deals with the penetrative sexual assault, is available with the prosecution. The trial Court has committed error in law in framing charge under Sec. 504 of the IPC against the applicant because even in the charge-sheet offence under Sec. 504 of the IPC was not alleged.

(3.) Learned Panel Lawyer has vehemently opposed the contentions raised by learned Senior Counsel for the applicant by placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Attorny General for India v. Satish and Another, Criminal Appeal No.1410 of 2021 decided on 18/11/2021.