Satyavati v. Party

1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 is taken on record. A judgment dated 14.05.2025, acquitting Sukhlal, the husband of the revisionist, passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 11357 of 2024 filed today in the Court is also taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for opp. party nos. 2 to 5, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

3. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 03.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur. By the said order, it has been alleged that learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur has dismissed the complaint of the revisionist in a cursory manner wherein, the daughter of the revisionist was allegedly killed by opp. party nos. 2 to 5 by drowning her in a pond, about 1 km. away from the village of the revisionist.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the daughter of the revisionist was a school going student and she was studying in XII Class at the relevant point of time. He further submits that on 10.01.2023, the deceased had gone to school, but she did not return back, however, the revisionist and her family members continued to search the deceased. Later on, the dead body of the deceased was found in a pond, about 1 km away from the village of the revisionist, on 24.01.2023. Thereafter, a first information report no. 0047 of 2023 was lodged at police station Sindhauli, District Shahjahanpur under Section 302 I.P.C. It has further been contended that false investigation has been conducted by the police and the complainant / husband of the revisionist was implicated in the said crime and 2 CRLR No. 5048 of 2024 he was arrested on 28.01.2023 and sent to jail. Thereafter the trial was conducted and the husband of the revisionist namely, Sukhlal/ informant was convicted under Section 302 / 201 I.P.C. However, against the conviction order dated 30.09.2024, the husband of the revisionist has filed an appeal before this Court and this Court after hearing the parties has has acquitted him and passed the following order:- " 58. The appellant is acquitted of the charges for lack of evidence led by the prosecution. Since the appellant-Sukh Lal is in jail. He be released forthwith subject to the condition that he is not wanted in any other case and subject to compliance of Section 437A Cr.P.C.

59. Let the trial court record along with a copy of this order be transmitted to the court concerned through Registrar (Compliance) forthwith and a copy of this order may also be sent to the Jail authorities concerned."

5. In the meantime, the wife of the revisionist submitted an application dated 04.09.2023 before the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur alleging therein, that her daughter was kidnapped by the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 namely, Avnish @ Matru Verma, Bablu Verma, Deepu Verma and Ramsaran Verma and whereabouts of her daughter were not known for about 12 days and finally her dead body was recovered on 24.01.2023. In her application dated 04.09.2023 submitted before the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur, allegation of kidnapping and hurling caste based remarks against opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were levelled. Thereafter a Complaint No. 127 of 2023 was filed before the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahjahanpur.

6. After hearing the complaint and considering the evidence available on record, the learned Special Judge dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. It has further been alleged that two witnesses were produced prior to summoning the opp. party nos. 2 to 5. It has been further submitted that Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur without going into the statements of CW-2 Mohd. Saleem and CW-3 Farookh and even the complainant herself have also been ignored, the said complaint has been dismissed without appreciating the evidences available on record prior to passing the summoning order.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 submitted that the allegations made in the complaint filed before the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur are false and baseless and the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur after going through the contents of the complaint and perusing the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. 3 CRLR No. 5048 of 2024 and considering the various aspects relating to the incident and death of the daughter of the revisionist dismissed the complaint of the revisionist. The said order is in accordance with law and calls for no interference by this Court. It has further been submitted that, it was the husband of the revisionist who was found involved in the murder of his daughter and was arrested on 28.01.2023. After conclusion of the trial, he was convicted. Though in the appeal filed against the order of conviction dated 27.09.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/FTC II, Court No. 24, Shahjahanpur, the husband of the revisionist has been acquitted of all the charges levelled against him and the appeal was allowed by this Court.

8. Learned counsel for the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 has further submitted that mere acquittal of the husband of the revisionist by itself does not prove that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 have committed the offence. It has further been contended that said appeal has been allowed for want of evidence and motive of killing the daughter of the revisionist could not be established, however, nowhere it has come in the order of acquittal that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were actually involved in killing of the daughter of the revisionist. Only on presumption and in absence of any evidence, it cannot be assumed that the real culprits, were none other than opp. party nos. 2 to 5. Learned counsel for opp. party no. 2 to 5 further submitted that the revisionist relied on the statements given by two persons namely Farookh and Mohd. Saleem however, the testimony of witness Farookh and Saleem is contradictory and he has relied on the statement given by Saleem even as Saleem has stated that he is not aware of the incident and has a little knowledge of the same and did not support the statement of Farookh.

9. Having regard to the rival submissions and the fact that the husband of the revisionist has been acquitted from all the charges levelled against him under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. does not itself leads to the conclusion that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 are real culprits, as nowhere it has been stated that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were actually involved in killing the daughter of the revisionist. Moreover, the statements of other two witnesses Mohd. Saleem and Farookh have been relied upon, wherein both the witnesses have made contradictory statements leading the case nowhere and merely because the revisionist levelled certain allegations against opp. party nos. 2 to 5 is not sufficient that in all probability the accused opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were responsible for killing the daughter of the revisionist. It may also be noted that prior to moving application dated 04.09.2023 before the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur, no action whatsoever has been initiated by the revisionist or her family members except that FIR was lodged on 24.01.2023 without naming any person. 4 CRLR No. 5048 of 2024

10. I have gone through the impugned order passed by the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, no interference is called for. The revision is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

11. Accordingly, this revision is dismissed. September 11, 2025 Gss (Harvir Singh,J.) GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 is taken on record. A judgment dated 14.05.2025, acquitting Sukhlal, the husband of the revisionist, passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 11357 of 2024 filed today in the Court is also taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for opp. party nos. 2 to 5, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

3. The present revision has been filed against the order dated 03.08.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur. By the said order, it has been alleged that learned Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur has dismissed the complaint of the revisionist in a cursory manner wherein, the daughter of the revisionist was allegedly killed by opp. party nos. 2 to 5 by drowning her in a pond, about 1 km. away from the village of the revisionist.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the daughter of the revisionist was a school going student and she was studying in XII Class at the relevant point of time. He further submits that on 10.01.2023, the deceased had gone to school, but she did not return back, however, the revisionist and her family members continued to search the deceased. Later on, the dead body of the deceased was found in a pond, about 1 km away from the village of the revisionist, on 24.01.2023. Thereafter, a first information report no. 0047 of 2023 was lodged at police station Sindhauli, District Shahjahanpur under Section 302 I.P.C. It has further been contended that false investigation has been conducted by the police and the complainant / husband of the revisionist was implicated in the said crime and 2 CRLR No. 5048 of 2024 he was arrested on 28.01.2023 and sent to jail. Thereafter the trial was conducted and the husband of the revisionist namely, Sukhlal/ informant was convicted under Section 302 / 201 I.P.C. However, against the conviction order dated 30.09.2024, the husband of the revisionist has filed an appeal before this Court and this Court after hearing the parties has has acquitted him and passed the following order:- " 58. The appellant is acquitted of the charges for lack of evidence led by the prosecution. Since the appellant-Sukh Lal is in jail. He be released forthwith subject to the condition that he is not wanted in any other case and subject to compliance of Section 437A Cr.P.C.

59. Let the trial court record along with a copy of this order be transmitted to the court concerned through Registrar (Compliance) forthwith and a copy of this order may also be sent to the Jail authorities concerned."

5. In the meantime, the wife of the revisionist submitted an application dated 04.09.2023 before the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur alleging therein, that her daughter was kidnapped by the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 namely, Avnish @ Matru Verma, Bablu Verma, Deepu Verma and Ramsaran Verma and whereabouts of her daughter were not known for about 12 days and finally her dead body was recovered on 24.01.2023. In her application dated 04.09.2023 submitted before the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur, allegation of kidnapping and hurling caste based remarks against opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were levelled. Thereafter a Complaint No. 127 of 2023 was filed before the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahjahanpur.

6. After hearing the complaint and considering the evidence available on record, the learned Special Judge dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. It has further been alleged that two witnesses were produced prior to summoning the opp. party nos. 2 to 5. It has been further submitted that Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur without going into the statements of CW-2 Mohd. Saleem and CW-3 Farookh and even the complainant herself have also been ignored, the said complaint has been dismissed without appreciating the evidences available on record prior to passing the summoning order.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 submitted that the allegations made in the complaint filed before the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur are false and baseless and the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur after going through the contents of the complaint and perusing the statements recorded under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. 3 CRLR No. 5048 of 2024 and considering the various aspects relating to the incident and death of the daughter of the revisionist dismissed the complaint of the revisionist. The said order is in accordance with law and calls for no interference by this Court. It has further been submitted that, it was the husband of the revisionist who was found involved in the murder of his daughter and was arrested on 28.01.2023. After conclusion of the trial, he was convicted. Though in the appeal filed against the order of conviction dated 27.09.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/FTC II, Court No. 24, Shahjahanpur, the husband of the revisionist has been acquitted of all the charges levelled against him and the appeal was allowed by this Court.

8. Learned counsel for the opp. party nos. 2 to 5 has further submitted that mere acquittal of the husband of the revisionist by itself does not prove that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 have committed the offence. It has further been contended that said appeal has been allowed for want of evidence and motive of killing the daughter of the revisionist could not be established, however, nowhere it has come in the order of acquittal that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were actually involved in killing of the daughter of the revisionist. Only on presumption and in absence of any evidence, it cannot be assumed that the real culprits, were none other than opp. party nos. 2 to 5. Learned counsel for opp. party no. 2 to 5 further submitted that the revisionist relied on the statements given by two persons namely Farookh and Mohd. Saleem however, the testimony of witness Farookh and Saleem is contradictory and he has relied on the statement given by Saleem even as Saleem has stated that he is not aware of the incident and has a little knowledge of the same and did not support the statement of Farookh.

9. Having regard to the rival submissions and the fact that the husband of the revisionist has been acquitted from all the charges levelled against him under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. does not itself leads to the conclusion that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 are real culprits, as nowhere it has been stated that opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were actually involved in killing the daughter of the revisionist. Moreover, the statements of other two witnesses Mohd. Saleem and Farookh have been relied upon, wherein both the witnesses have made contradictory statements leading the case nowhere and merely because the revisionist levelled certain allegations against opp. party nos. 2 to 5 is not sufficient that in all probability the accused opp. party nos. 2 to 5 were responsible for killing the daughter of the revisionist. It may also be noted that prior to moving application dated 04.09.2023 before the Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur, no action whatsoever has been initiated by the revisionist or her family members except that FIR was lodged on 24.01.2023 without naming any person. 4 CRLR No. 5048 of 2024

10. I have gone through the impugned order passed by the Special Judge (POCSO)/ Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 8, Shahhahanpur and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, no interference is called for. The revision is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

11. Accordingly, this revision is dismissed. September 11, 2025 Gss (Harvir Singh,J.) GIRAJA SHANKER SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad