TAPAN DEBNATH Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Alik Das, Learned Counsel representing the petitioner and also heard Learned P.P. Mr. Raju Datta representing the State.

(2.) This revision petition under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C. is filed for setting aside the order dtd. 13/3/2024 passed by Learned Special Judge, Gomati District, Udaipur in connection with case no.Special no.22 of 2023(POCSO).

(3.) At the time of hearing, Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid case is pending before the Court of Learned Special Judge, Gomati District, Udaipur and before the said Court, the accused-petitioner filed an application for discharging the accused under Sec. 227 of Cr.P.C on the ground that the victim of this case although has been projected as a minor but from the copy of birth certificate, it appears that she was major on the day of the alleged occurrence of offence. So, no charge can be framed against the accused-petitioner under Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act. But the Learned Trial Court did not consider the petition and rejected the application of the petitioner-accused and fixed the case for framing of charge.