RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN
Pradum Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Shri Alok Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajnish Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A., however, no one has appeared on behalf of the informant/ complainant.
2. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 31.03.2022 in Case Crime No. 56 of 2022, under Sections 376AB, 506 IPC and Section 5/6 of Ptotection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, Police Station-Asiwan, District- Unnao.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. As per prosecution story so narrated in the FIR, the present applicant has made oral sex with the daughter of the complainant/informant, who is aged about ten years. As per FIR, the present applicant, who is the neighbour of the informant/complainant, in the evening at 9:30 P.M. when informant/complainant was with her husband, the applicant came and asked that his mother is calling the prosecutrix/victim and after a lapse of time, the complainant along with her husband went for search of their daughter. While searching, they heard so
Ganesan Vs. State represented by its Inspector of Police
Krishan Kumar Malik v. State of Haryana
Phool Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Rajesh Ranjan Yadav v. CBI through its Director
Sham Singh vs. State of Haryana
State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain
State of Orissa v. Thakara Besra
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.