RAMESH PARMAR Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT has preferred this criminal revision under Section 397 read with 401 of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by an order dated 17.10.14 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Sidhi in Sessions Trial No. 228/2014 State of M.P. Vs. Ramesh Parmar, whereby, the applicant is charged with the offence punishable under Section 376(2) of the I.P.C.

(2.) BRIEF facts necessary for adjudication of this revision are given below: -

(3.) PER contra, the learned Panel Lawyer has submitted that the contents of the FIR and the case diary statement of the prosecutrix would reveal that the applicant had sexually exploited the prosecutrix during the period between November, 2009 to September, 2013 having been in a position of authority by virtue of his supervisory position over the official functions of the prosecutrix. He, further, submitted that the applicant would sexually exploit the prosecutrix by putting her into fear of losing her government job in case he would write an adverse report against her in exercise of his authority. Therefore, the applicant has prima facie committed an offence punishable u/S 376 (c) (a) of the I.P.C., which has been in force w.e.f. 03.02.13. Thus, the trial Court ought to have framed charge against the applicant under the aforesaid Section. Thus, the trial Court has erred by not framing the aforesaid charge against the applicant. But, on this ground, the applicant cannot be discharged as the case is at the stage of trial and the trial Court has power u/S 216 of the Cr.P.C. to alter or add the charges.