SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(UK) 379

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
RAJIV SHARMA, ALOK SINGH JJ.
State - Appellant
Versus
Sartaj Khan - Respondent
Government Appeal No. 139 of 2016
Decided On : 07-12-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the State : Mr. Amit Bhatt, Dy. A.G. with Mr. K.S. Rawal, Brief Holder
For the Respondent: Mr. Ramji Srivastava, Legal Aid Counsel

JUDGMENT :

RAJIV SHARMA J.

1. The State has come in appeal against the judgment dated 04.05.2016, rendered by learned Special Sessions Judge, Champawat in Special Sessions Trial No.07 of 2015, whereby the respondent, who was charged with and tried for the offences under Section 363, 366-B, 370(4), 506 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act, was acquitted.

2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that at 11:00 AM, S.I. Manju Pandey, In-charge Human Trafficking Unit Shadra Bairaj, Banbasa along with other police officials reached at Sharda Bairaj near Indo-Nepal border towards eastern side to check the illicit human trafficking. One volunteer namely Meera Sauda was also with them. They were checking the people coming from Nepal border. At about 13:30 hours, a secret information was received that an Indian boy was trying to import a minor girl of Nepal origin for the purpose of exploitation. The information was acted upon and one girl was noticed near a cart selling snacks towards the eastern side of Sharda Barrage. The name of the girl was ascertained. She disclosed her name Km. Jainisha Sharma D/o Moti Ram Sharma, R/o Village Koteshwar, District Kathmandu, Nepal, aged about 15 years. The investigation was carried out by maintaining all decency through Meera Sauda, who was well conversant with Hindi and Nepali languages. She disclosed to the police party that on 10.04.2015, she came all alone to see her uncle namely Arjun Sharma, who was a teacher in Lamki (Nepal). On 11.04.2015 at about 10:00 AM, she was having ice-cream from a cart at Atariya Bus stand. A boy came and stood by her side. He also started having the ice-cream. He tried to entice her. He allured her that he would take her to Banbasa in India where she can do shopping. They would stay in a hotel at Banbasa and in the morning, he would send her back to Atariya, Nepal. She trusted him. The boy brought her from Atariya, Nepal to Mahendra Nagar. He started pressing her breast in the bus. She told him not to do so. Thereafter, at Mahendra Nagar, he made her to sit on a horse cart, which was going towards India. They reached Banbasa bridge at about 13:45 hours. The gate was closed. Many horse carts and vehicles were parked. There was lot of rush. The boy got down from the horse cart and told her that there was police checking. He tutored her to tell the police that she was going to Banbasa for shopping. He started walking ahead. He told her that he would see her after some distance. Thereafter, they searched the boy. They reached near canal gate. The boy was standing near the tree facing towards bridge. Km. Jainisha recognized the boy and told that he was the same boy, who has enticed her to come from Nepal. The boy was arrested. He disclosed his name Sartaj Khan, S/o Sardar Khan, R/o Mohalla Bhure Khan, P.S. Khakhra, District Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh. He was aged 30 years. He admitted his guilt. The respondent and girl were brought to the office for counseling. Other police officials also reached the spot. It was, prima facie, found that the boy had brought the girl to India for exploitation. The personal search of the respondent was carried out. One pocket diary, one packet of condom, two man force tablets, Indian and Nepal currency and two mobile phones were found from his possession. The seizure memo was prepared. One copy of the same was handed over to the respondent. PW2 Km. Jainisha Sharma was medically examined by PW4 Dr. Vinod Kumar Joshi.

3. The FIR was registered. The investigation was carried out and the challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities.

4. The prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses in its support.

5. Thereafter, the statement of respondent was recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. He denied the case of the prosecution. According to him, he was falsely implicated.

6. The respondent was acquitted by the Trial Court, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, this appeal by the Government.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State






























































































































































































































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top