SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(P&H) 1628

N. S. SHEKHAWAT
Jamshed – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Parties : Mr. Mohit Garg, Ms. Sheenu Sura DAG, Haryana, Mr. Varun Issar, Mr. Ankur Lal

Judgment

Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to issue directions to the trial Court to summon the witness/concerned official of UIDAI, Regional Office, in view of the amendment to Section 33(1) of the Aadhar Act 2016 [made vide “the Aadhar & other laws (Amendment) Act, 2019], (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Aadhar Act’).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was arrayed as an accused in a case FIR No. 10/2018 under Sections 363, 366, 376 and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the POCSO Act’). In the said case, the complainant/respondent No. 3 had taken a stand that she was minor, whereas, it was the consistent stand of the petitioner that Section 6 of the POCSO Act was not made out as the prosecutrix was not a minor girl and she had produced false record regarding her age. In order to prove that the prosecutrix was a minor girl, the prosecutrix alleged that her date of birth was 31.05.2001. To prove her birth certificate as well as the age, the prosecutrix examined PW10 Ram Kumar, Clerk, MC, Faridabad, who appear

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top