Sadiq Mohammad vs State Of U.T. Chandigarh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(P&H) 1573

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SUMEET GOEL
Sadiq Mohammad – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.T. Chandigarh – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. K.S. Dadwal, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. P.S. Paul, Addl. P.P. U.T., Chandigarh; Mr. Sapan Dhir

JUDGMENT :

Sumeet Goel, J.

Instant criminal revision petition is directed against the order dated 25.07.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge Special Court, Chandigarh. Vide impugned order, application filed by the prosecution under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking summoning of the petitioner as additional accused was allowed. Resultantly, the petitioner was summoned to face trial under Sections 376, 363, 366 IPC, and Section 4 of the POCSO Act.

2. Facts of the case are that the complainant in the case got FIR No.428, dated 09.10.2017 under Section 363 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh. In the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the complainant, i.e., the victim of the case, aged 17 years, had gone missing from her home. The Police, during the investigation of the case, traced and recovered the victim and got her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. recorded in the case. The story as unfolded by the statement of the victim was that on the night of 08.10.2017, main accused Irfan forced the victim to come out of her home asking for some money. When the victim came out of her house to give money to Irfan, he dragge