MUNNI DEVI AND ANOTHER V. STATE OF U.P AND ANOTHER ON 4TH DECEMBER 2021
| Date of Judgement | 4th December 2021 |
| Court | Allahabad High Court |
| Case type | Criminal Revision No. 3145 of 2021 |
| Revisionist | Munni Devi and Another |
| Opposite Party | State of U.P and Another |
| Bench | Vikas Budhwar |
| Referred | Section 161 of CrPC- Examination of witnesses by policeSection 164 of CrPC- Recording of confessions and statementsSection 319 of CrPC- Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offenceSection 351 of CrPC- Appeals from convictions under Sections 344, 345, 349 and 350Section 397 of CrPC- Calling for records to exercise powers of revisionSection 401 of CrPC- High Court’s Powers of revisionsSection 168 of IPC- Public servant unlawfully engaging in tradeSection 190 of IPC- Threat of injury to induce a person to refrain from applying for protection to public servant.Section 366 of IPC- Kidnapping, abducting or inducing women to compel her marriage, etcSection 363 of IPC- Punishment for kidnapping Section 370-A of IPC- Exploitation of a trafficked personSection 376 of IPC- Punishment for rapeSection 120-B of IPC- Criminal ConspiracySection 16 of the POCSO Act- Abetment of an offenceSection 17 of the POCSO Act- Punishment for abetment |
FACTS OF THE CASE
- An FIR was lodged by the victim’s mother under Sections 363, and 366 of IPC against Vedram. A victim whose name is Khushboo aged 14 years was missing from her house when she left to buy vegetables around 6 O’clock in the evening.
- The mother of Khushboo made constant searches by tracing out her location or whereabouts but she was not found. Three days after lodging an FIR Vedram misguided Khushboo and had taken her away. Vedram also used to treat the victim badly and harass her when she was alone.
- Khushboo stated that her age was 25 years and she had a friendship with Vedram. They both used to meet each other and one fine day she called him to her house and everything happened according to her will. Then she got married which was about one year. Later on, she gave birth to a girl child. Thus she states that Vedram was not guilty of the complaint lodged by her mother. This statement was given to the police station by Khushboo according to Section 161 of CrPC.
- Later Khushboo confessed that her aunty and another person named Suresh sold her to Vedram for 1 lakh. She was locked up in her room for more than one and a half years. She wasn’t allowed to go out of that room and she was severely raped which resulted in a female child. She also stated that if she said anything to anyone she would be killed and she never wanted to stay with Vedram and neither did she get married to him. In the medical report, her age was found that she was only 17 years. Thus a charge sheet was filed against Vedram.
- Nahni Devi who is a prosecutor witness gave a statement that Aunty and Suresh were together for 10-12 years.
Applicant 1- Munni Devi w/o Gudu Sharma
Applicant 2- Suresh
Both applicants had already kidnapped two to four girls. Suresh was considered as an occultist.
- Khushboo stated that her aunty was Munni Devi, one fine day she called Khushboo to the terrace where Suresh was also present. They both made her unconscious by applying some drug to the handkerchief when the victim smelled it. She fell unconscious. Thereafter she was sold for 1 lakh rupees to Vedram. She was taken to a place named Lalkuan in a four-wheeler accompanied by both applicants and Vedram. She was kept locked in a house and she was raped which resulted in the birth of a girl child. Vedram tortured her badly and harassed her violently.
- One day when she was alone at home, she found Vedram’s brother’s phone. She called her mother and narrated what had happened to her.
- Till the end of the investigation she strongly affirmed that she did not marry Vedam.
- Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge Court passed an order by summoning the applicants for the offence under Sections 363, 366, 370A, 376 and 120-B of IPC and Sections 16, 17 of POCSO.
- Thus the above order was challenged for a Criminal Revision in the High court of Allahabad by the revisionist.
ISSUES INVOLVED
- Whether the judgement given by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge Court was valid with the application of Section 319 of CrPC within the limit as said in the provision?
ARGUMENTS OF PARTIES
The Court had enough relevant materials for the crime committed by both applicants and accused to start the criminal proceedings and to prosecute them. The applicant 1 and 2 argued that the Court must hear both sides. All must be treated equally and must hear and give the right to the innocent side of the accused person. According to Article 20 & 21 of the Indian Constitution, gives protection to lead a proper administration of justice to ensure a fair and efficacious trial. The Constitution of India also gives equal protection to both accused and victim to be heard and to prove their side. The presumption of innocence is proved by the way that all men are innocent before the Court of law until and unless they are proved as guilty in the eyes of law.
Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014)
The scope and ambit of the powers are vested upon the Magistrate under 319 of CrPC. It is no more res integra as the Constitutional Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case. The Constitution made Article 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India as a protective shelter for smooth administration of justice to make fair and efficacious trials. The accused need not get harmed by the law after punishing the accused for the offence similarly it also gives equal protection to victims and society that the accused cannot escape from his offence getting him punished in the eyes of law. Thus the Criminal laws are being codified and modified appropriately and the criminal administration of justice should work properly. So that an innocent should not get punished and the accused must get punished and be brought before the Court. Thus the accused must not roam freely without getting punished.
Doctrine of Judex damnatur cum nocens absolitur is a doctrine used under Section 319 of CrPC. This doctrine means ‘Judge is condemned when guilty is acquitted.’ It is used during the ambit and spirit of Section 319 of the CrPC.
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS INVOLVED
Section 319 of CrPC- deals with the powers to proceed after proving the other person who appears to be guilty of an offence with the help of proof/ evidence.
- During the time of an inquiry, trial that through the finding of the evidence found that any person who has been involved in the commission of offence, that person would be tried together with the accused, the Court shall proceed with that person for the offence which he has committed.
- When that person does not appear before the Court, he would be arrested or summoned when the circumstances of the case arise.
- When that person appears before the Court without getting arrested or summoned shall be detained by such Court for the purpose of inquiry or trial.
- The Court proceeds with that person freshing and the witness be re-heard. The case would proceed as if he is an accused when the Court takes up the case as cognizance of the offence during inquiry and trial was commenced.
Section 363 of IPC- deals with the offence of kidnapping.
Anyone who kidnaps any person from India or from a lawful guardian will be punished for a term of 7 years and also liable for a fine.
Section 366 of IPC- kidnapping or forcing a person to get married
Anyone who kidnaps or abducts a woman and forces her to marry against her will or seduces her into an illicit intercourse faces a year in prison and a fine.
Section 370A of IPC- deals Exploitation of a trafficked person
Anyone who indulges in trafficking a minor for sexual exploitation in any manner shall be imprisoned with rigorous punishment of not less than 5 years which may extend to 7 years and also a fine is imposed. Anyone who trafficks a person for sexual exploitation shal be imprisoned with rigorous punishment of not less than 3 years which may extend to 5 years and impose fine.
Section 376 of IPC- punishment for rape
Section 120B of IPC- deals with Criminal Conspiracy
Section 16 of POCSO- deals with Abetment of an offence
Section 17 of POCSO- deals with Punishment for abetment
Article 20 of Indian Constitution- deals with arrested person right
Article 21 of Indian Constitution- deals with right to life
JUDGEMENT
The Court dismissed the revision which was made to the High Court of Allahabad. The order passed by the Additional Sessions Judges Court which summons all the applicants to be tried and punished for the offence committed by all of them under Sections 363, 366, 370A, 376 and 120-B of IPC and Sections 16, 17 of POCSO. Thus the revision made by the applicants was dismissed.
REFERENCES
This Article is written by B. Michael Shriney of Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Intern at Legal Vidhya.
