Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 294 (ALL)

PARWATI VERMA v. STATE OF U. P.

2017-01-20

PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

body2017
JUDGMENT : Hon'ble Pramod Kumar Srivastava, J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA and perused the records. In sessions trial no. 470 of 2008 (State Vs. Qumod Verma and others) relating to crime no. 161 of 2008, section 342, 366, 376 IPC, P.S. Vrindavan, Mathura, two accused persons namely Qumod Verma and Chetan Verma were charged for offences under section 366, 342, 376 IPC. The prosecution case in brief was that these persons had abducted the victim Smt. Anita and kept her at several places including house of Smt. Parwati Verma and committed rape with her. During trial, after examination of PW-1 victim, the prosecution side had moved application dated 22.12.2008 for summoning Smt. Parwati as accused in aforesaid case. After hearing the prosecution side, the Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Court No. 4, Mathura had passed impugned order dated 25.11.2008, by which said application was allowed and the accused Murari and Smt. Parwati were summoned for trial. Said order of summoning under section 319 Cr.P.C. has been challenged through present revision by Smt. Parwati Verma. From perusal of record, it is found that revisionist had been granted interim relief of stay of proceedings during pendency of this revision. But proceedings of trial of S.T. No. 470 of 2008 (State Vs. Qumod Verma and others) was carried out and concluded, after which the court of Additional Sessions Judge-II, Mathura had acquitted those accused persons from all the charges by its judgment dated 9.5.2011. Counsel for revisionist informed that this order had become final as no appeal has been preferred against said judgment dated 9.5.2011 of sessions court. Learned AGA also have no information about any such appeal being preferred against said order. Since the main prosecution case relating to alleged offence of case crime no. 161 of 2008 of P.S. Vrindavan has been found not proved and prosecution case was disbelieved and charges in that regard were not proved and such order has become final, therefore, there is no legal justification or propriety in carrying out proceedings of trial of revisionist on the basis of impugned order of summoning, during which same witnesses, who were already examined and had been disbelieved, would be examined for supporting same prosecution case. In view of the above, this revision is allowed. The impugned orders of trial court for carrying out proceedings of sessions trial against revisionist for case crime no. In view of the above, this revision is allowed. The impugned orders of trial court for carrying out proceedings of sessions trial against revisionist for case crime no. 161 of 2008, P.S. Vrindavan are quashed. The copy of this order be communicated to trial court for ensuring compliance.