Back
SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV
Suneeta Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
2. The present application has been filed by the applicant-Suneeta Pandey for quashing of the impugned order dated 03.12.2018, whereby the applicant has been summoned to face the trial u/s 376-D, 212 IPC in exercise of power conferred under Section 319 Cr.P.C. as well as entire proceedings of Special Criminal (Sexual) Case No.08 of 2016 (State Vs. Fanindra Mani Ojha alias Dablu and others) arising out of Case Crime No.874 of 2015, under section 376-D & 212 I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Bansi, District-Siddharth Nagar, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge-Ist, Siddharth Nagar with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
3. As per F.I.R., the incident took place on 24.06.2015 and the F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons on 28.07.2015 bearing Case Crime No. 874 of 2015, under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C. alleging therein that someone has enticed away the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years and took her with him.
4. Statement of the victim has been rec
The absence of specific allegations against the petitioner regarding gang rape under Section 376D of the IPC necessitates the setting aside of the charge, reaffirming the need for prima facie evidenc....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power under section 319 of Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and only when there is much stronger evidence than mere probability of co....
Section 354A of the IPC is gender-specific and cannot be applied to female accused, necessitating quashing of charges lacking specific allegations.
(1) Conviction cannot be based solely on statements made by accused under sub-section (1) of Section 313 of Cr.P.C.(B) Gang rape – Enhancement in sentence is not justified many years after incident.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the summoning of accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. should be based on evidence establishing more than mere complicity in the crime.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for sufficient evidence to prove the commission of offenses under Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act and Section 376 of IPC, highlig....
The presumption of innocence, the need for a fair trial, and the requirement for the prosecution to prove all elements of the alleged offences were central legal principles established in the judgmen....
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
