Full Text
Translation output
# HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.REV.P. 285/2015 & Crl.
M.A. No.7214/2015
MADINA
Petitioner
Through Petitioner with her counsel Mr. Aamir Naseem, Adv.
CRL.REV.P. 285/2015 & Crl.
M.A. No.7214/2015
MADINA
Petitioner
Through Petitioner with her counsel Mr. Aamir Naseem, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE NCT OF DELHI
Respondent
Through Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State along with SI Anita.
• CRL.REV.P. 287/2015 & Crl.
M.A. No.7234/2015
NAZMEEN
Petitioner
Through Petitioner with her counsel Mr. Aamir Naseem, Adv.
Respondent
Through Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State along with SI Anita.
• CRL.REV.P. 287/2015 & Crl.
M.A. No.7234/2015
NAZMEEN
Petitioner
Through Petitioner with her counsel Mr. Aamir Naseem, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE NCT OF DELHI
Respondent
Through Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State along with SI Anita.
Respondent
Through Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for the State along with SI Anita.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
28.09.2015 The order impugned before this Court is the order dated
18.09.2014. Vide this order, the Sessions Judge on the perusal of the statement of the victim (S) recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC had taken cognizance of the offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile
Justice Act against the mother and nani of the victim namely Nazmin and Madina.
2015:DHC:11251 Present petitions have been filed by Madina (maternal grandmother of the victim) and the mother Nazmeen. Both the petitioners are present in Court today. So also the victim 'S'. It was on her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC which had been recorded wherein she had stated that her mother and grandmother used to often scold her and on one occasion had asked her to leave the house which the Trial Court thought was the sufficient material to take cognizance of an offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
This Court notes that the present FIR (pursuant to which charge- sheet has been filed) had been registered on the complaint of the victim against an unknown person. Tabiz was the person who had been identified as the accused; after the initial FIR having been registered under Section 363 of the IPC, in view of the statement given by the victim under Section 164 of the Cr.PC, Sections 366/376 of the IPC as also Section 6 of the POCSO Act were also added. This Court has been informed that the charge-sheet has since been filed and the accused in that case (Tabiz) had been granted regular bail.
The impugned order as noted supra is an offshoot of the main proceedings. The victim is present in Court today. She states that her statement which has been recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC was merely to the effect that on certain occasions her mother used to scold her; this was a normal mother-daughter relationship; her allegation that her 'nani' used to reprimand her was also a nani/grandmother- granddaughter relationship and the 'S' has no grievance against either of them. The presence of the complainant has been identified by the
Investigating Officer.
These facts as narrated supra have been confirmed by the complainant.
Noting the above factual matrix, this Court is ofthe view that the impugned order dated 18.09.2014 which has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act against the petitioners was totally uncalled for. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC has been mis-appreciated; it was in a normal relationship where her mother and 'nani' used to scold her on occasions for which a mother and a grandmother are well entitled to do; the Court had mis-read this statement and read an imaginative meaning into it to treat it as a case of harassment to the victim amounting to wilful neglect which has led to a mental suffering of the victim. This order appears to be wholly illegal. It is accordingly set aside.
Revision petitions are allowed and are disposed offin the above terms.
INDERMEET KAUR, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2015 A
28.09.2015 The order impugned before this Court is the order dated
18.09.2014. Vide this order, the Sessions Judge on the perusal of the statement of the victim (S) recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC had taken cognizance of the offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile
Justice Act against the mother and nani of the victim namely Nazmin and Madina.
2015:DHC:11251 Present petitions have been filed by Madina (maternal grandmother of the victim) and the mother Nazmeen. Both the petitioners are present in Court today. So also the victim 'S'. It was on her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC which had been recorded wherein she had stated that her mother and grandmother used to often scold her and on one occasion had asked her to leave the house which the Trial Court thought was the sufficient material to take cognizance of an offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
This Court notes that the present FIR (pursuant to which charge- sheet has been filed) had been registered on the complaint of the victim against an unknown person. Tabiz was the person who had been identified as the accused; after the initial FIR having been registered under Section 363 of the IPC, in view of the statement given by the victim under Section 164 of the Cr.PC, Sections 366/376 of the IPC as also Section 6 of the POCSO Act were also added. This Court has been informed that the charge-sheet has since been filed and the accused in that case (Tabiz) had been granted regular bail.
The impugned order as noted supra is an offshoot of the main proceedings. The victim is present in Court today. She states that her statement which has been recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC was merely to the effect that on certain occasions her mother used to scold her; this was a normal mother-daughter relationship; her allegation that her 'nani' used to reprimand her was also a nani/grandmother- granddaughter relationship and the 'S' has no grievance against either of them. The presence of the complainant has been identified by the
Investigating Officer.
These facts as narrated supra have been confirmed by the complainant.
Noting the above factual matrix, this Court is ofthe view that the impugned order dated 18.09.2014 which has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act against the petitioners was totally uncalled for. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC has been mis-appreciated; it was in a normal relationship where her mother and 'nani' used to scold her on occasions for which a mother and a grandmother are well entitled to do; the Court had mis-read this statement and read an imaginative meaning into it to treat it as a case of harassment to the victim amounting to wilful neglect which has led to a mental suffering of the victim. This order appears to be wholly illegal. It is accordingly set aside.
Revision petitions are allowed and are disposed offin the above terms.
INDERMEET KAUR, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2015 A
JUDGMENT