State of U.P. and Another v. Party

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the revisionists for setting aside the order dated 21.02.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Aligarh for framing of charges in Session Trial No. 296 of 2022. under Sections 376, 427, 354A, 506 I.P.C. against the revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh, under Section 323 I.P.C. against revisionist no. 2 Azra revisionist no. 3 Rihana @ Rehana and under Section 354A I.P.C. against revisionist no. 4 Mohd. Zameeruddin.

3. The brief facts of the case as unfolded in the F.I.R. are that on

04.03.2021, the informant complaint Sufia lodged a first information report alleging therein that on 02.02.2021, the accused revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh had taken obscene photographs of the informant and shown to her. When she asked to delete it, he came in her house in the evening and committed wrong activity with her and extended life threat to the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists are innocent, they have not committed the alleged offence but they have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she stated that the accused Azra, sister of the revisionist no. 1 and Rihana, mother of the revisionist no. 1 had thrashed the informant and warned her not to have 2 CRLR No. 1588 of 2023 physical relationship with revisionist no. 1 Shariq. It is next submitted that as per medical examination report, no external injury was found on the body of the informant. It is next submitted that statement of the informant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she stated that she went to the shop of Shariq and purchased facial kit. Shariq had taken her mobile number and some photographs were taken. Shariq broken her mobile phone and his friends had committed wrong with her. Guddu had molested her. When she protested, he threatened to kill her. Sister and mother of Shariq also beaten her. It is next submitted that there are contradictions in the statements of the opposite party no. 2 recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is also submitted that an F.I.R. was lodged in Case Crime No. 0022 of 2021, under Sections 384, 388, 504, 506 I.P.C. against the opposite party no. 2 by sister of the revisionist no. 1 and the present case has been registered as counterblast to the said case. It is next submitted that the informant has signed a compromise with Noor Islam in which she stated that on

08.09.2020 there was a dispute regarding money related to milk and due to angriness, she gave an application making allegation that Noor Islam did wrong work with her and now matter has been settled with the help of some reputed persons and she did not want any legal action against him in this regard. It is next submitted that no injury was found on the private part of the body and if no injury was found, it cannot be said that the said offence has been committed by the revisionists but the learned trial court has committed illegality in framing charges against the revisionists. It is next submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial court is wholly illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of law and the same is liable to be set aside.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist and submitted that the statement of the opposite party no. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted by the police against the revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh under Sections 376, 506, 427 I.P.C., against revisionist no. 2 Azra and revisionist no. 3 Rihana @ Rehana under Section 323 I.P.C. and against revisionist no. 4 Mohd. Zameeruddin under Section 354(Ka) I.P.C., on which cognizance was taken by the court concerned and charges were framed against them. The learned trial court has not committed any illegality 3 CRLR No. 1588 of 2023 in framing the charges against the revisionists which may call for any interference by this Court, thus the present revision is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have carefully considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. Keeping in view the settled principles of law at the time of framing of charges, the learned trial court has taken into consideration the evidence collected by the police during investigation and upon perusal of the statements of the informant and other witnesses, medical report and other documents, the learned trial court has reached on a conclusion that offence is made out against the revisionists. The F.I.R. was registered against the revisionists under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and statements of victim/opposite party no. 2 were recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted by the police against the revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh under Sections 376, 506, 427 I.P.C., against revisionist no. 2 Azra and revisionist no. 3 Rihana @ Rehana under Section 323 I.P.C. and against revisionist no. 4 Mohd. Zameeruddin under Section 354(Ka) I.P.C., on which cognizance was taken by the court concerned and charges were framed against them. Thus, there is no illegality, perversity or impropriety in the impugned order and charges have rightly been framed against the revisionists after considering the entire material available on record. Moreover, the revisionists will get every opportunity to reverse the contentions of the prosecution.

8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that impugned order is suffering from any such illegality, perversity or any other material irregularity. The present revision lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. October 13, 2025 Rmk. (Chawan Prakash,J.) RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The instant criminal revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the revisionists for setting aside the order dated 21.02.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Aligarh for framing of charges in Session Trial No. 296 of 2022. under Sections 376, 427, 354A, 506 I.P.C. against the revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh, under Section 323 I.P.C. against revisionist no. 2 Azra revisionist no. 3 Rihana @ Rehana and under Section 354A I.P.C. against revisionist no. 4 Mohd. Zameeruddin.

3. The brief facts of the case as unfolded in the F.I.R. are that on

04.03.2021, the informant complaint Sufia lodged a first information report alleging therein that on 02.02.2021, the accused revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh had taken obscene photographs of the informant and shown to her. When she asked to delete it, he came in her house in the evening and committed wrong activity with her and extended life threat to the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists are innocent, they have not committed the alleged offence but they have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the statement of the informant under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she stated that the accused Azra, sister of the revisionist no. 1 and Rihana, mother of the revisionist no. 1 had thrashed the informant and warned her not to have 2 CRLR No. 1588 of 2023 physical relationship with revisionist no. 1 Shariq. It is next submitted that as per medical examination report, no external injury was found on the body of the informant. It is next submitted that statement of the informant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she stated that she went to the shop of Shariq and purchased facial kit. Shariq had taken her mobile number and some photographs were taken. Shariq broken her mobile phone and his friends had committed wrong with her. Guddu had molested her. When she protested, he threatened to kill her. Sister and mother of Shariq also beaten her. It is next submitted that there are contradictions in the statements of the opposite party no. 2 recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is also submitted that an F.I.R. was lodged in Case Crime No. 0022 of 2021, under Sections 384, 388, 504, 506 I.P.C. against the opposite party no. 2 by sister of the revisionist no. 1 and the present case has been registered as counterblast to the said case. It is next submitted that the informant has signed a compromise with Noor Islam in which she stated that on

08.09.2020 there was a dispute regarding money related to milk and due to angriness, she gave an application making allegation that Noor Islam did wrong work with her and now matter has been settled with the help of some reputed persons and she did not want any legal action against him in this regard. It is next submitted that no injury was found on the private part of the body and if no injury was found, it cannot be said that the said offence has been committed by the revisionists but the learned trial court has committed illegality in framing charges against the revisionists. It is next submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial court is wholly illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of law and the same is liable to be set aside.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the revisionist and submitted that the statement of the opposite party no. 2 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded and after completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted by the police against the revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh under Sections 376, 506, 427 I.P.C., against revisionist no. 2 Azra and revisionist no. 3 Rihana @ Rehana under Section 323 I.P.C. and against revisionist no. 4 Mohd. Zameeruddin under Section 354(Ka) I.P.C., on which cognizance was taken by the court concerned and charges were framed against them. The learned trial court has not committed any illegality 3 CRLR No. 1588 of 2023 in framing the charges against the revisionists which may call for any interference by this Court, thus the present revision is liable to be dismissed.

6. I have carefully considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. Keeping in view the settled principles of law at the time of framing of charges, the learned trial court has taken into consideration the evidence collected by the police during investigation and upon perusal of the statements of the informant and other witnesses, medical report and other documents, the learned trial court has reached on a conclusion that offence is made out against the revisionists. The F.I.R. was registered against the revisionists under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and statements of victim/opposite party no. 2 were recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted by the police against the revisionist no. 1 Shariq @ Mohd Sharukh under Sections 376, 506, 427 I.P.C., against revisionist no. 2 Azra and revisionist no. 3 Rihana @ Rehana under Section 323 I.P.C. and against revisionist no. 4 Mohd. Zameeruddin under Section 354(Ka) I.P.C., on which cognizance was taken by the court concerned and charges were framed against them. Thus, there is no illegality, perversity or impropriety in the impugned order and charges have rightly been framed against the revisionists after considering the entire material available on record. Moreover, the revisionists will get every opportunity to reverse the contentions of the prosecution.

8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that impugned order is suffering from any such illegality, perversity or any other material irregularity. The present revision lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. October 13, 2025 Rmk. (Chawan Prakash,J.) RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad