CHIMANLAL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision is directed against the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Badnagar, District ­ Ujjain in Sessions Trial No.221/2015 dated 05.06.2015 whereby, learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges against the present applicant under sections 363, 366, 376(2) and 506 (2) of IPC and under section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

(2.) According to the prosecution story, on 11.03.2015, it is alleged that the prosecutrix when she went at about 8:30 pm behind her house to answer call of nature, was abducted by the present applicant alongwith Mishrilal Yadav. It is further alleged that they took the prosecutrix to the house of Mishrilal Yadav located at village Kharsodkala and there, present applicant Chimanlal Yadav and another co -accused Kamal Yadav committed rape on her. Next day, she was taken to Badnagar where, she was kept in a room of Bhil. On 18.03.2015, accused Chimanlal Yadav and Kamal Yadav came and took her to another place. From there, it is alleged that she was left at Tea Stall and from there she came back to home on her own.

(3.) This order framing charges against the present applicant under aforementioned provisions of law was challenged by the applicant on the ground that the prosecutrix was traced on 19.03.2015. On that very day, her statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C. was recorded and immediately thereafter, her statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C. was also recorded and in both these statements, she narrated rather truncated story and there she stated that present applicant met her and took her to the room of a Bhil person and there she was kept and during all these period, she was not raped by anybody. However, after four days, another statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she stated the whole story as described above.