True Court CopyTM


Matters Under Article 227 No. 4775 of 2018

Decided On: 29.10.2018

Appellants: Amir and Ors.
Respondent: Seerat Jahan

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Saumitra Dayal Singh


Saumitra Dayal Singh, J.

1. Heard, Sri. I.K. Chaturvedi learned counsel for the petitioner, learned AGA for the State and Sri. Rajesh Yadav learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

2. The present petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 15.11.2017 passed by the C.J.M., Moradabad in case crime no. 120 of 2014 under Section 376, 323 IPC, P.S. Majhola, District Moradabad and the order dated 27.6.2018 in the revision arising therefrom, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 13, Moradabad in Criminal Revision No. 42 of 2018 (Sakeel and others Vs. State of U.P and others). The petitioners are the accused persons who have been summoned by the order dated 15.11.2017, upon the acceptance of the protest petition filed by respondent no. 2 who is the informant of the case.

3. An FIR had been lodged by the respondent no. 2 on 23.2.2014 alleging commission of offence under Section 342, 376, 312, 506, 323 and 392 IPC against the accused persons. According to the FIR, on 10.3.2011 the petitioners had abducted respondent no. 2 along with her father and confined them at a house situated at Syohara, Jayantipur Mandir Gali (near the Ice-factory), Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad. It was further alleged, during that confinement respondent no. 2 and her father were locked up in two different rooms and that during such confinement, the petitioners and certain unnamed persons repeatedly committed rape on the respondent no. 2. It was then alleged that on 5.5.2011, while the respondent no. 2 and her father were thus under the confinement of the petitioners, they forcibly got executed in favour of Mohd. Afzal Choudhary and Monis (petitioner no. 4), a registered sale deed, by the father of respondent no. 2, of a residential house property identified as property admeasuring 0.40 sq. yards at Syohara, Moradabad. The FIR further alleged that due to repeated rape committed on respondent no. 2, she became pregnant which was forcibly got terminated by the accused persons at a private hospital. Further allegation was made that the accused Sahil tried to subject respondent no. 2 to human trafficking but that she and her old father somehow escaped from the custody of the petitioners. It was also alleged that certain valuables/jewellery of the respondent no. 2 had been snatched by the petitioners and that they had threatened the respondent no. 2 and her father with dire consequences during their confinement and that the accused persons had committed assault many times.

4. As to the delay in lodging the FIR, it was explained that the respondent no. 2 returned to Syohara on 4.12.2012 and that she had submitted an application to the Additional S.P. Rural, District Bijnor on 05.12.2012 and also to the I.G. Police, Bareilly on 12.06.2013. She claimed to have pursued other police authorities as well. It appears that thereafter certain complaint was made to the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, whereafter the FIR came to be lodged.

5. The police upon investigation submitted a final report on 11.6.2014 whereupon protest petition was filed by the respondent no. 2. On that, by order dated 18.9.2015 further investigation was directed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad. Upon such further investigation, another final report was submitted whereupon the second protest petition was filed by the respondent no. 2. It is on such (second) ........