PARUL YADAV Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner Parul Yadav seeking a direction to the SHO/Magistrate concerned to re-record her statement under Section 164 CrPC.

(2.) Briefly stated facts relevant and essential for disposal of the misc. petition are narrated hereinbelow:

(3.) The petitioner filed an FIR No.172 dated 25.07.2020 against Deepaklal, Jaspreet and Inder at the Police Station Bhadra for the offences under Sections 376, 342, 420 & 120-B of the IPC. During the course of investigation, the statement of the petitioner was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. She has now approached this Court by way of this misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. alleging that when the first statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded, the complainant-petitioner was under pressure of the threat by the accused and thus, she could not give a faithful version of the offences which were committed upon her and that the said statement does not set out a correct version of the incident which took place with the petitioner-complainant. On these grounds, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction for fresh recording of her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Shri V.K. Bhadu, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following judgments