Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 433 (RAJ)

Virendra Kumar Saraswat v. State of Rajasthan

2019-02-06

PANKAJ BHANDARI

body2019
JUDGMENT : PANKAJ BHANDARI, J. 1. Petitioner has preferred this Criminal Revision Petition aggrieved by judgment and order 21.01.2019 passed by Special Judge, POCSO Act, 2012, (POCSO Act) No. 4, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, whereby Court below has framed charges under Section 354, 354(A)(1)(i) of I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 2. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner earlier also approached the Court against framing of charges under the Indian Penal Code along with framing of charges under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act. The Criminal Revision Petition No. 539/2018 was allowed by this Court on 14.12.2018 and it was specifically observed by the Court that where in offence falls under Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, the Act being a special legislation, there is no requirement for framing charges under the Indian Penal Code as the sentence provided under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act is more than the sentence which is provided under the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is contended that the Court below was directed to frame charges afresh. It was specifically mentioned in the earlier order that there was no justification for framing charges under the Indian Penal Code despite there being a specific direction, Court below has again framed charges under Section 354, 354(A)(1)(i) of I.P.C. 4. I have considered the contentions and have also perused the impugned order as well as the charges which have been framed against the petitioner. 5. From perusal of the statement of allegation in the charges, it is revealed that allegations in the charges which are levelled under Section 354, 354(A)(1)(i) of I.P.C. are akin to the allegations which are levelled for framing charges under Section 7 read with Section 8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act. It is surprising that the Court below even after referring to the order passed in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 539/2018 and quoting Para No. 6 of the order, wherein, it was observed that the offence would fall under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and not under the Indian Penal Code has again framed charges under the Indian Penal Code which is a matter of serious concern. 6. Order passed by the Court below therefore deserves to be quashed. The present Criminal Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. 7. 6. Order passed by the Court below therefore deserves to be quashed. The present Criminal Revision Petition is accordingly allowed. 7. Trial Court is directed to frame charges afresh. 8. Stay application also stands disposed. 9. Registry is directed to seek explanation from the concerned Officer and place the same before the Court.