2023 Supreme(All) 2136
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.
Poonam – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and 4 Others – Respondents
Criminal Revision No. 480 of 2023
Decided on : 17-11-2023
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ranjeet Singh, Akhilesh Kumar Vishwakarma, Anil Kumar Singh.
For the Respondent: G.A., Divyansh Sharma, Sonu Malik.
The court upheld the Investigating Officer's closure report, determining that the allegations in the FIR were not substantiated by evidence, thus affirming the dismissal of the protest petition.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 156(3) - Criminal Revision against acceptance of final report in a case of alleged honor killing - Court dismissed the revision, finding no merit in the claims of the revisionist and no irregularity in the investigation conducted by police. (Paras 1, 17)
(B) Investigation - Investigating Officer found no substantiation of allegations in the FIR after thorough examination of witnesses and evidence, leading to closure of case against named accused. (Paras 8, 17)
Facts of the case:
The bodies of Ankit and Sulekha were found in a well, leading to allegations of murder against several individuals. Initial FIR suggested suicide, but postmortem revealed homicide. (Paras 3, 15)
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the final report of the Investigating Officer, stating that the FIR was a delayed response to the previous case filed by the father of Ankit. (Paras 17)
Issues: The primary issues included the credibility of the investigation, the timing of the FIR, and whether the allegations were substantiated. (Paras 17)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the investigation was thorough, and the delay in filing the FIR indicated an attempt to exert pressure on the previous case, warranting dismissal of the revision. (Paras 17)
Result: Revision dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, J. - Instant Criminal Revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 01.12.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Etawah in Final Report Case No.1048 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No.110 of 2022, under Sections 120B, 302, 376, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO) Act, Police Station Bharthana, District Etawah. By the impugned order, learned court below has accepted final report filed by the Investigating Officer after carrying out investigation into the aforesaid case and dismissed the Protest Petition filed by the informant/Revisionist.
2. I have already heard the learned counsel for the revisionist as well as leaned counsel for the respondent No.2 to 5, and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
3. The factual matrix of the case in brief are that in the instant case dead body of Ankit and Sulekha (daughter of the informant/revisionist) was found at the outskirts of the village in the well, the deceased Ankit was son of Pradeep Kumar Shakya. The informant Pradeep Kumar Shakya lodged First Information Report which was registered vide Crime No.258 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201, 120B of I.P.C., just after recovery of dead body of two adolescent deceased couple. As per first FIR lodged in respect of murder of said Ankit and Sulekha, the informant who is father of Ankit, stated that his son Ankit Kumar who is aged about 17 years had developed lover affair with Sulekha daughter of named accused Ram Prasad; their relationship was going on for last one year to the knowledge of the father of girl, and for that reason family of Ram Prasad had extended threat to Ankit, the deceased that he would be seen and was threatened to be killed. On 30.03.2020 at around 7:30 pm deceased Ankit was caught by Saurabh and other named accused at his shop where he remained present for a long time with Raju @ Razi and thereafter the named accused person who included Saurabh, Rajiv, father and brother of deceased girl had gone away with the deceased towards the field. The informant's brother Sanjeev, Ambika Prasad and his son Sachin had seen the deceased being taken away by the accused persons towards the field. On 02.04.2020 the dead body of Ankit and Sulekha were found in the well of Ahibaran, therefore the informant believed that accused persons had caused the death of informant's son and Sulekha with whom he had developed relationship by something and had thrown their dead body into the well with a view to conceal the evidence. The inquest and postmortem of the dead body of the deceased was carried out. On 02.04.2020 in inquest report the panch witnesses who included family members of both the deceased, had expressed opinion that deceased boy and girl had committed suicide by jumping in the well. However in postmortem report of both the deceased, cause of death was found to be smothering. In the internal examination of the deceased girl hymen was found torn old and heal, her age is mentioned as 17 years (approximate). The approximate time of death was two days ago the postmortem. Vaginal swab was taken for pathological examination. Both the deceased were found to have sustained two injuries on their person which consists of multiple contusion and abrasion on lip and face.
4. It appears that prior to lodging of FIR by Pradeep Kumar Shakya, the father of deceased Ankit, Smt. Nandlesh (mother of deceased Ankit) lodge a missing report with Station House Officer, Kotwali on 01.04.2020 stating that on 30.03.2020 at about 7:30 pm her son Ankit had gone on being called by Saurabh son of Rajiv to his shop and thereafter he did not come back till 90:00 pm. He was searched in the vicinity, but nothing can be known to him, thereafter another application was given to police on 02.04.2020, but the same facts were repeated, and apprehension was raised that they might have been abducted and thereafter killed. During the search of Ankit