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

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Himanshu Gandhi – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates:
Gaurav Tiwari,Advocate General

This revision has been filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order dated 23.09.2021

passed by learned 23rd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge under the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 in ST No.10/2021

whereby charges for offences punishable under Sections 354, 354-A (1) (i),

354-D and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 9 (l)(m)/10 of the

Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, have been framed against

the applicant.

2. Learned Senior Counsel has challenged the impugned order

framing charges on many grounds. The applicant and the prosecutrix are

neighbours and there is enmity between the parties and the applicant had

1

earlier made complaints against the mother of the prosecutrix due to

neighbourhood disputes. It is contended, inter alia, that the mother of the

minor prosecutrix deliberately refused for her medical examination. It is

vehemently contended that there is no ingredients for framing charges under

Sections 504, 354 and 354D of the IPC. Learned Senior Counsel has drawn

the attention of this Court to Section 3 of the Protection of Children from

Sexual Offences Act and contends that no

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top