High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 10 UK CK 0026

Dheeraj Singh Kasana and Bhupendra Singh vs State of Uttarakhand

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 14 October 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
Prafulla C. Pant, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Application (C482) No. 945 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 284 words

Hon''ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.—Heard.

2.

By means of this petition moved u/s 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.) the petitioners have sought quashing of the of the proceedings of criminal case no. 2495 of 2005, State vs. Dheeraj Singh and others, relating to offences punishable u/s 292, 293 Indian Penal Code, one punishable u/s 5A/7 of Cinematography Act, 1952,and u/s 4/6 of Indecent Representation of Women Act, 1986, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hardwar.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners were managers of licensed theater in which movie ''SHARABI RAAT'' which has been granted certificate of ''for adults'' by the Censor Board was being exhibited. It is pleaded that the raid could have been conducted only by the Entertainment Tax Inspector. It is also contended that petitioners have committed no offence as the movie was cleared by the Censor Board.

4.

However, the allegations in the FIR are that it was found that while exhibiting the aforesaid movie, porn videos were also been shown intermittently. As far as offences punishable u/s 292, 293 Indian Penal Code, and one punishable u/s 4/6 of Indecent Representation of Women Act, 1986, are concerned there is no bar for the police officers to register the crime in respect of the offences under said Acts.

5.

As far as factual pleas of defence are concerned, the same can be appreciated by the trial court.

6.

Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties, and after going through the papers on record, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the trial of the case. Therefore, the petition u/s 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, is dismissed summarily.