IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
KULDEEP MATHUR
Pappu Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
KULDEEP MATHUR, J.
1. By way of filing the criminal misc. petition being under Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this misc. petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 01.03.2025 passed by the Learned Court in Cr. Case No.75/2024 dismissing petitioner’s application filed under Sec.216 of CrPC may kindly be quashed and sets aside and learned trial court may may be directed to frame the charges for the offences under section 458 of IPC, sections 9(g)/10 & 11(i)/12 of POCSO Act against the accused respondent as per the statements of the victims recorded under Section 164 of Cr.PC by allowing the application filed by the petitioner under section 216 of Cr.P.C.
Any other appropriate order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that on 06.02.2024, Pappu Ram S/o Hema Ram submitted a written complaint at P.S. Marwar Junction alleging inter alia that on 05.02.2024 when his daughters namely ‘S’ aged about 15 years and ‘Sh’, aged about 16 years
The court upheld the trial court's discretion in rejecting the application to frame charges, affirming that the power to alter charges is exclusive to the court.
The court cannot quash an FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C. based on the correctness of allegations, especially when serious cognizable offences are disclosed.
The trial court has the power to alter charges at any stage before judgment based on convincing material and grounds, without prejudicing the accused.
(1) Alteration of charge – At the stage of exercising jurisdiction under Section 216 Cr.P.C., trial court must satisfy : itself that there exists convincing material and grounds to alter existing cha....
The court clarified the applicability of specific sections of IPC and POCSO Act based on the evidence of the case, distinguishing between the roles of the accused.
Serious offences under IPC and POCSO cannot be quashed based on settlements between parties.
The court ruled that allegations of sexual harassment under the POCSO Act must be evaluated on evidence, even amidst claims of family rivalry, necessitating a trial.
The court emphasized the need for evidence in support of altering or adding charges and highlighted the importance of justifying such actions based on the circumstances of the case.
The court confirmed that the power to alter charges under Section 216 Cr.P.C. resides exclusively with the court, ensuring the judicial process's integrity without granting parties a demandable right....
Charges under POCSO can be framed without new allegations if based on existing evidence, emphasizing the seriousness of claims made against the accused.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.