Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Tribhuvan Dahiya, J.
Dr. Ashok Kumar Yadav - Petitioner - Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana & another - Respondents - Respondent
Criminal Revision No.343 of 2023 (O & M)
Decided On : 22-02-2023
Criminal Offences - Jurisdiction of Special Court - Sections 328, 376, 377 IPC - The court discussed the jurisdiction of the Special Court to take cognizance of the offences under Sections 328, 376, 377 IPC without a committal order by the Magistrate. The court held that the Special Court was within its jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences and summon the petitioner without a committal order, as the offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Session. The court also emphasized that the procedural lapse did not cause any prejudice to the petitioner and did not result in any failure or miscarriage of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was summoned for offences under Sections 328, 376, 377 IPC based on a complaint alleging rape and unnatural sexual offences. The complainant submitted a complaint to the police, and a cancellation report was filed, leading to the complainant filing a Protest Petition and producing preliminary evidence before the Special Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Special Court was within its jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences and summon the petitioner without a committal order by the Magistrate. It also concluded that there was sufficient prima facie evidence to summon the petitioner for the alleged offences.
Issues: The main issue was whether the Special Court had the jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences without a committal order by the Magistrate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Special Court was within its jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences and summon the petitioner without a committal order, as the offences were exclusively triable by the Court of Session. The court emphasized that the procedural lapse did not cause any prejudice to the petitioner and did not result in any failure or miscarriage of justice.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the court upheld the summoning order issued by the Special Court.
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.
Leave granted.
This is a revision petition against order dated 06.01.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Hisar (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Special Court’), vide which the petitioner has been summoned for commission of offences punishable under Sections 328, 376, 377 IPC.
2. The facts in brief are, respondent No.2-complainant submitted a complaint dated 13.09.2022 to the Superintendent of Police, Hisar, alleging that she was subjected to rape and unnatural offence by the petitioner, in conspiracy with one Dr. Suresh Jaiswal, at night on 31.08.2022 in Room No.108, on the premises of Flamingo Restaurant, Hisar. The complainant, aged about 44 years, stated that she was employed as Medical Representative (Sales) with Hegs Pharma Medical Company, Ludhiana, Punjab, and also worked as freelancer with Renaults Medical Company for sale of medical health products in February/March 2022. The complainant met the petitioner, who is a doctor by profession, in his hospital-Ashok Hospital, Friends Colony, near street No.3, Jawahar Nagar, Hisar. The petitioner assured the complainant that he was President and under his influence she would get orders for the medical health products she was selling. On 30.08.2022, the petitioner made a phone call to the complainant asking her to come to Hisar on 31.08.2022 before 02:00 PM. On reaching Hisar, the complainant called the petitioner, who asked her to come at Camp Chowk, Hisar. The complainant reached there, and the petitioner took her in his Innova car to Government Flamingo Restaurant Complex. He again assured the complainant that her products would definitely be purchased by him, but first they should have some refreshments. The complainant started giving details of her products to the petitioner, who received a phone call and informed her that it was a friend of his, who was a senior Government officer. He also assured the complainant to get a government job arranged for her. Then he called his friend Dr. Jaiswal to Flamingo Complex, who also sat along with them. The petitioner thereafter left the restaurant stating that he was going to Narwana, and also stated that Dr. Jaiswal was also interested in buying the products, so the complainant should talk to him in the meanwhile. Dr. Jaiswal continued talking to the complainant from 02:30 PM to 05:40 PM in the restaurant. He then received a call from the petitioner, and told the complainant that a room had been booked for her there only. The complainant said that she had already made arrangement for stay at Hisar, but Dr. Jaiswal told her to take rest there, as in the evening her meeting with other doctors was scheduled. He then left the place at 06:00 PM. She checked into Room No.108 on 31.08.2022 after 06:00 PM. Around 08:00 PM, the petitioner came in the room. The complainant felt scared and thought of escaping. The petitioner called the waiter, who brought beer for him. There the petitioner, by intoxicating the complainant, subjected her to rape and unnatural sexual offences forcibly. On gaining consciousness, she immediately left the room and went to her friend’s (Somy) house at Hisar. When she was getting ready to leave from Hisar on 01.09.2022, the petitioner gave her a phone call reminding that she had promised to meet him, but she left. She finally gathered courage and submitted a complaint, dated 13.09.2022, to the police with a request to collect CCTV footage of the restaurant and take action against the petitioner and co-accused, and also to provide protection to her.
3. On the basis of this complaint, FIR No.66 dated 13.09.2022 under Sections 120-B, 376, 377 IPC, Women Police Station, Hisar, was lodged. The complainant’s medical examination was conducted on 14.09.2022 and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was also recorded, wherein she reiterated the allegations as contained in the FIR. The police did not arrest the accused; instead, questioned both the parties and reached a con
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Special Court had the jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences and summon the petitioner without a committal order by the Magistrat....
Pont of law : Procedure provided under Section 33 (1) with regard to the power of the Special Court to take cognizance, without any committal of the accused, to the extent of any inconsistency, would....
The Special Court under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act cannot take direct cognizance of offences under the IPC without prior committal by a Magistrate, aligning with the hierarchy of c....
The Special Court under the SC/ST Act can take cognizance of offences without prior commitment from a Magistrate and amendments have no retrospective effect unless expressly stated.
The court clarified that taking cognizance of an offence requires applying judicial mind to the complaint, and mere examination of the complainant does not suffice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of jurisdiction in trying cases and the constitutional mandate for a speedy trial.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
