AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In instant revision, there is challenge to order dated 16.01.2025 passed on Exhibit 16 in Special Case No. 307/2022 by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Aurangabad by which prayers for discharge of revision petitioner are turned down.
Mother of a minor aged 13 set law into motion by lodging report on 14.07.2022 that her daughter was contacted on instagram by a unknown caller posing to be her friend and threatened her to make her photograph viral and further requested her to snap her own photographs in naked condition and send it on the number and this being disclosed by the minor, police was approached. In the report, mobile numbers from which contact was developed with the minor were provided i.e. bearing nos. 8431229025 and 9035189301.
Learned counsel for revision petitioner pointed out that petitioner is falsely implicated. That, there is noting to connect the petitioner with alleged occurrence reported in the first information report. That, there are allegations that informant’s daughter was contacted by some unknown account holder by using his mobile number. That, one person named as Vyankatesh, resident of Karnataka, was allegedly involved in creation of fake account in fake name. That, another mobile allegedly emerging during investigation is shown to be petitioner’s mobile number. That, mobiles are already seized. Investigation is over. Petitioner is a student. He has never contacted minor daughter of informant and, therefore, there being no incrementing material in the entire charge-sheet, he urges to allow his discharge application.
Learned APP has strongly opposed the application on the ground that serious offence has been committed and minor daughter of informant has been contacted by creating fake instagram account. That, minor has been threatened to pose in nude condition. On report of mother, crime has been registered for offence section 354B, 354-D of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Section 66-C of Information Technology Act. According to learned APP, investigation revealed involvement of two mobile numbers and one of it belongs to present petitioner and, therefore, there being incrementing material, he prays to dismiss the application.
Before adverting to merits of the case, it would be just and proper to spell out settled legal position while considering discharge application under Sections 227 and 228 of the Cr.P.C. It is fairly settled position that, at such stage, Court dealing with such application is merely expected to determine existence of prima facie material for proceeding to frame charge and make accused persons face trial. Material gathered during investigation is expected to be sifted with limited purpose to find out whether there are sufficient grounds to proceed against accused. Neither in-depth analysis nor meticulous analysis of evidence is expected at such stage. Thus, the only duty of Court is to ascertain whether there is prima facie material suggesting existence of essential ingredients for the offences, which are alleged to be committed. Above position has been time and again reiterated since the cases of State of Bihar v/s Ramesh Singh (1977) 4 SCC 39; Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal and Another (1979) 3 SCC 4, and a decade back in the cases of Sajjan Kumar v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2010) 9 SCC 368; Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander and another (2012) 9 SCC 460; State of Tamil Nadu (By Inspector of Police Vigilance and Anti-Corruption) v. N.Suresh Rajan and Others. (2014) 11 SCC 709; Asim Shariff v. National Investigation Agency (2019) 7 SCC 148; and Ram Prakash Chadha v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) 10 SCC 651.
Heard and perused the papers. As pointed out, it seems that informant’s daughter aged 13 was contacted on instagram. Initially she was told that her photograph is already with them and same would be edited and morphed and made obscene and further forwarded to relatives and parents and she was thereby asked to do as directed. Minor girl was asked to show her entire body in naked condition and, therefore, when her parents realized her to be upset, there was disclosure by her to them to above extent. Mother in the report has supplied two mobile numbers, which were allegedly put to use for making contact with minor. Investigating machinery and cyber crime claims that one of the number i.e. 9035189301 belongs to present petitioner and, therefore, he has been implicated. Instagram chats exchanged with the minor are also placed on record. Statement of the victim is also recorded. She seems to be 13 years of age and taking education in 9th standard. On the basis of IP address, investigation has been carried out and involvement of two persons including present petitioner is revealed.
Consequently, in the light of above material on record, this Court does not find it to be a fit case to exercise powers under Section 227 of Cr.P.C to discharge accused. Accordingly, Criminal Revision Application stands dismissed.