Rajendra Prasad Banjare @ Bablu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Criminal Revision No.488 of 2018 Rajendra Prasad Banjare @ Bablu, son of Ganga Prasad Banjare, aged about 21 years, R/o Village Pendry, Indira Awas, P.S. Masturi, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh through the Station House Officer, Police Station Torwa, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent For Applicant : Shri Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate For Respondent : Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order on Board 22.6.2018 1.

Heard on admission.

2.

The revision has been preferred against the order dated 23.3.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Bilaspur in Special Criminal Case No.13 of 2018 by which charges under Sections 17 and 18 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 have been framed against the Applicant. 3.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant submits that coaccused Vishal Dhiraj is the main accused of the instant case. There is nothing on record on the basis of which the Applicant could be charged. Therefore, no prima facie case is made out against the Applicant. Hence, he prays for quashing of the charges framed against the Applicant.

4.

On the other hand, Learned Counsel appearing for the State submits that there is named First Information Report against the

Applicant and in the FIR, which is lodged by the prosecutrix herself, it is categorically mentioned that the Applicant had assisted the main accused in committing the offence in question. Therefore, prima facie case is made out against the Applicant and he has been rightly charged by the impugned order.

5.

I have heard Learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available with due care. 6.

The FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix herself. In the FIR, it is mentioned that the Applicant had assisted the main accused in committing the offence. The Applicant had taken the prosecutrix inside the room and was keeping a watch outside the room. Therefore, there is a prima facie case made out against the Applicant. The Trial Court has rightly framed the charges. 7.

I find no merit in the instant revision. It is, therefore, dismissed at the admission stage itself.

Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Gopal