IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
ARVIND KUMAR MISHRA-I, J.
Jijo C. George – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And Others – Respondents
Application U/S 482 No.35719 of 2022
Decided on : 01-12-2022
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226, 227, 21 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376, 328, 323, 504, 506, 498A, 355, 452 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482, 157, 173 - Indian Divorce Act, 1869 - Section 10 A - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Offence of rape - Offence Punishable –First Information Report - Causing hurt by means of poison - Punishment for criminal intimidation - Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt - husband may petition for dissolution - Saving of inherent powers of High Court - Report of police officer on completion of investigation - Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace - Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour a person - House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful restraint -Whether inherent jurisdiction of this Court can be invoked during investigation of a case - Can it be said that no offence is made out from perusal of report? Can it be said that no cognizable offence is made out from perusal of report –Held, Court is of considered view that at this stage, when investigation is going on attention of Investigating Officer would be on allegations made in first information report which aspect, per se, is based upon alleged commission of offence of rape upon opposite party by applicant and consequent development of pregnancy and birth of a child - Investigating Officer is free to collect material relevant by following due procedure of law - At investigation stage, no interference is warranted by this Court and investigation may go on uninterruptedly - Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
1 Heard Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Arun Kumar Tripathi, .learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Subhash Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent no.4, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 18.10.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IX, Allahabad, in Case -State vs. Jijo C. George arising out of the First Information Report registered at Case Crime No.0070 of 2022, under Sections 376, 328, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Mutthiganj, District-Praygraj and the operation and effect of the order impugned dated 21.10.2022 passed by Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Allahabad, in C.N.R. No. UPAD01-013127-2022, whereby he allowed the application of the Investigating Officer concerned to proceed with blood test / DNA test of the applicant during investigation.
3. The applicant-Jijo C. George-feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid direction/order of the Magistrate has approached this Court invoking inherent powers of this Court in this matter wherein investigation is in progress and the applicant has been directed for undergoing DNA test.
4. In this case, a peep into facts of the case proceeds on line that an F.I.R. was lodged by the victim (opposite party no.2) that on 21.05.2022 referring to some incident that allegedly occurred on 05.12.2019 and onwards. The description in the first information report proceeds on to claim that the informant/prosecutrix was engaged in teaching profession at Ewing Christian College, Prayagraj. She was in contact with the present applicant-Jijo C. George and (also in teaching profession in ECC), he taking advantage of the situation invited her to a tea party at 11:00 a.m. on 05.12.2019 at his campus residence in the Ewing Christian College, where both the applicant and the respondent no.4 were working as Assistant Professors. It is a case of the prosecutrix that she went to the applicant's house and took tea but she felt giddy and became unconscious on account of some noxious substance mixed in the tea and administered upon her. When she became unconscious, the applicant forcibly committed rape upon her. Upon regaining consciousness, she found herself in critical position on bed and realized that her modesty was outraged, while she asked the applicant as to why he deceitfully invited her, he threatened and said to her that he has made a video clip of the incident and would inform about it to her husband and viral it in case any protest is raised. Due to which the prosecutrix became apprehensive and the applicant continued to blackmail her and continued to commit rape upon her at different places due to which she became pregnant.
5. As the F.I.R. proceeds further it divulges various details of subsequent events that led to the lodging of this first information report.
6. Background of the case may be looked into for proper appreciation of the case wherein offence of rape is allegedly committed by the applicant. In this case, the informant is 37 years of age, is presently posted as Assistant Professor in the department of English in Ewing Christian College, Prayagraj (hereinafter referred to as ECC), whereas the applicant presently 32 years of age, was stated to be 28 years of age at the time of the incident (05.12.2019), was also posted as Assistant Professor in the same department of ECC, Prayagraj. it is claimed that no medical examination of the prosecutrix was conducted in this case. It is case of the prosecutrix (opposite party no.4) that she was married to one Atul Stenali Harmit at Prayagraj according to the Christian Rites and Rituals. She is mother of the two children namely Anya Samara Harmit, aged about 5 years and Jeremi Allen Hermit, aged about 1-1/2 years old.
7. The applicant belongs to Kerala and he came over to Prayagraj for the first time in the year 2012 when
Zandu Pharmacutical Works Ltd. and others Vs. Mohd. Sharaful Haque and another (2005) 1 SCC 122
The court affirmed that the evidence of the prosecutrix is sufficient for conviction in rape cases, and a DNA test is not necessary at an advanced trial stage, balancing this against the right to pri....
DNA test is also available before the Court, which is marked as Annexure-H and only in order to overcome the positive report of the DNA, the petitioner has approached this Court by invoking the writ ....
(1) DNA examination – Merely because something is permissible under law, cannot be directed as a matter of course to be performed particularly when a direction to that effect may encroach privacy and....
DNA test - Become absolutely necessary to order DNA test to find out the truth regarding the paternity of the second petitioner.
The only disadvantage to the child which is put forward as an argument against the use of a blood test, not for therapeutic purposes but to ascertain paternity, is that the child is exposed to the ri....
Point of law: The only disadvantage to the child which is put forward as an argument against the use of a blood test, not for therapeutic purposes but to ascertain paternity, is that the child is exp....
The court emphasized the limitations on the right to privacy in cases involving DNA testing and highlighted the importance of oral evidence and the role of medical evidence as secondary evidence in c....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in criminal cases involving allegations of sexual offenses and disputed paternity, DNA testing can be ordered by the court if it is deemed nec....
Point of Law : Question of production of additional evidence by the plaintiff in appeal shall arise only after piece of evidence is available and for that purpose an application has been filed by the....
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.