1. By the instant criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. petitioner-complainant has assailed order dated 17th of February, 2017, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Pali District, Pali (for short, learned trial Court). By the order impugned, learned trial Court, after hearing arguments on charge, while resorting to Section 227 Cr.P.C. discharged the accused-respondent for offence under Section 376 IPC but framed charges under Section 228 Cr.P.C. for offence punishable under Sections 451, 366, 323/34 IPC.

2. Succinctly stated, facts of the case are that petitioner-complainant laid a complaint against accused-respondent before Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Marwar Junction, District Pali, inter-alia, alleging offence under Sections 342 & 366A IPC. The learned Magistrate, thereupon, forwarded the same under sub-section (3) of Section 156 Cr.P.C. to Police Station Siriyari, District Pali and pursuant thereto FIR No. 8/2010 was registered for aforesaid offences. During investigation, police recorded statement of petitioner’s daughter (prosecutrix) under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and upon completion of investigation filed charge-sheet against accused-respondent for offence under Section 299 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate, after considering the offences slapped against accused-respondent, passed an order under Section 209 Cr.P.C. for committing the case to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge, thereafter, transferred the matter to learned trial Court.

3. It so happened that after submission of charge-sheet against him, at the behest of respondent, a criminal misc. petition bearing No. 422/2012 is preferred before this Court for quashing the charge-sheet and the same is decided on 10th of February, 2012 with the following observations:

“However, looking to the contention of learned senior counsel that the petitioner is an impotent person, it is hereby directed that the petitioner should surrender himself before the trial court and on his so surrendering, the medical examination of the petitioner shall be conducted by a medical board, particularly for the examination of potency of the petitioner, and thereafter, the petitioner shall be entitled to raise all his objections against his proposed prosecution at the stage of consideration of the charges and in the event of medical board’s report being favourable to the petitioner, the trial court shall be under an obligation to consider the same as per law and in reference to the period during which the offence was committed.”

4. Later on, accused-respondent surrendered and in due course of time in compliance of order of the Court subjected to medical examination by the Board. Learned trial Court, thereafter, heard arguments for framing charge against the accused-respondent and upon consideration of the available material and the report of Medical Board framed charges against him for offence under Sections 376, 458, 366, 323 & 34 IPC by its order dated 25.09.2013.

5. Being aggrieved by the said order, accused-respondent preferred a revision petition before this Court, which was registered as S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 767/2013. The aforesaid revision petition was decided on 19th of September 2014. The operative part of order dated 19th of September 2014, in vernacular, reads as under:

^^mijksDr rF;ksa dks /;ku esa j[krs gq,] fo}ku v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk vkjksi fojfpr fd, tkus ds Øe esa ikfjr vk{ksfir vkns'k iqu% vkjksi fojpu ds Øe esa lquokbZ ds mn~ns'; ls vikLr dj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; dks funsZ'k fn;k tkrk gS fd fnukad 12-5-2012 dks esMhdy T;wfjLV] ckaxM vLirky] ikyh dh vksj ls tkjh fjiksVZ esa jk; okys Hkkx esa iksVsalh VsLV ds lEcU/k esa ftu&ftu foHkkxksa ls jk; izkIr djus ckcr fy[kk x;k gS] bl lEcU/k esa lEcfU/kr fu;a=d vf/kdkjh dks fjiksVZ dh Áfr Hkstdj bl lEcU/k esa vfHk;qDr@;kph dk mldh iksVsalh lEcU/kh vfUre jk; ckcr ifj.kke ÁkIr djsa ,oa ifj.kke ÁkIr gksus ds i'pkr iwoZ vkns'k ls izHkkfor gq, fcuk nksuksa i{kksa dks lqudj mDr ifj.kke dks