# Netrpal v. State of U.P. & Anr. Opp. Parties

- **Citation:** (2024) 2 ILRA 1276
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-01-25
- **Case number:** Application u/s 482 No. 45646 of 2023
- **Bench:** Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/netrpal-v-state-of-u-p-anr-opp-parties-51334
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

(A) Criminal Law - The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent
power, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The
Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
- Sections 15-A , 15-A(3), 15-A(5) & 15A(11) - Rights of victims and Witnesses,
The Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 - Sectio 7/8, The
Protection
of
Children
from
Sexual
Offences Rules, 2020 - Rule 4(15) -
Victim/complainant
has
right
to
information
about
proceedings
-
Investigating Officer must inform them.
(Para -7)

Petitioner seeks to quash summoning order
under POCSO Act - Court expresses displeasure
over police authorities' failure to serve notice to
complainant/victim despite statutory provisions.
(Para - 1,2)
2 All. Netrpal Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1277
HELD: - Court directs Director General of
Police,
UP,
to
issue
guidelines
ensuring
compliance with statutory provisions. Police
must intimate complainant/victim about case
pendency and submit report with instructions.
(Para - 9)

Put up as Fresh. ( E-7)

## Text

1276 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. relating to the
investigation in NCR No. 94 of 2017, and
the said order was also never challenged by
the accused, much less in this application.
Thus, this Court does not find any merit in
the argument relating to the violation of
Section 155(2) Cr.P.C., which has been
raised after a long delay, therefore, the
same is hereby rejected.

8.

Now,
while
analysing
the
impugned order dated 21.11.2023, it
becomes clear that the Additional Chief
Judicial
Magistrate,
Mathura
has
specifically observed that as per the first
report filed under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.,
the offence punishable under Section 307
I.P.C. is made out against the accused, but
when cognizance order against the accused
was passed solely on the basis of
supplementary report under Section 173(8)
Cr.P.C. relating to the offences punishable
under Section 323, 506 I.P.C., it would not
mean that charge regarding Section 307
I.P.C. contained in the first report stood
rejected, as there is no such order passed by
the
court.
Consequently,
the
court
proceeded to summon the accused for the
alleged
commission
of
offence
punishable under Section 307 I.P.C.
also. A reading of the impugned order
would show that the same is based upon
correct appreciation of law, and if, there
are conflicting reports submitted by
police in a case, the court of competent
jurisdiction is to examine both the
reports to arrive at a just conclusion. In
this regard, a reference can be made by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vinay Tyagi
v. Irshad Ali @ Deepak and others,
2013 (5) SCC 762.

9. No other argument has been raised
by the learned counsel for the applicants.

10. Resultantly, this Court does not
find any convincing ground to exercise the
inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The application is accordingly, dismissed.
----------
(2024) 2 ILRA 1276
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 25.01.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH
DESHWAL, J.

Application u/s 482 No. 45646 of 2023

Netrpal ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opp. Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Surya Nath Bhatt, Sri Gaurav Kumar
Srivastava

Counsel for the Opp. Parties:
G.A.

(A) Criminal Law - The Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent
power, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The
Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
- Sections 15-A , 15-A(3), 15-A(5) & 15A(11) - Rights of victims and Witnesses,
The Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, 2012 - Sectio 7/8, The
Protection
of
Children
from
Sexual
Offences Rules, 2020 - Rule 4(15) -
Victim/complainant
has
right
to
information
about
proceedings
-
Investigating Officer must inform them.
(Para -7)

Petitioner seeks to quash summoning order
under POCSO Act - Court expresses displeasure
over police authorities' failure to serve notice to
complainant/victim despite statutory provisions.
(Para - 1,2)
2 All. Netrpal Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1277
HELD: - Court directs Director General of
Police,
UP,
to
issue
guidelines
ensuring
compliance with statutory provisions. Police
must intimate complainant/victim about case
pendency and submit report with instructions.
(Para - 9)

Put up as Fresh. ( E-7)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh
Deshwal, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the
applicant and learned AGA for the State.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application
has been filed to quash the impugned
summoning order dated 20.10.2023 passed
by
Additional
Sessions
Judge/Special
Judge, POCSO Act (Budaun) in Complaint
Case No.159 of 2023, Rama Devi Vs.
Netrpal, under Section- 7/8 of POCSO Act,
Police Station-Mujariya, District- Badaun.

3. It appears from the record that
offence in question is arising out of the
POCSO Act, there is a statutory provision
to serve notice upon the complainant before
passing any order.

4. It is informed by learned AGA that
the intimation by the office of Government
Advocate, High Court, Allahabad was sent
to
the
concerned
I.O.
through
Superintendent of Police and Joint Director
of Prosecution on 01.12.2023 for seeking
instructions
and
in
reply
thereto,
instructions
was
also
supplied
on
07.02.2024 by the concerned I.O. but, the
report regarding service of notice upon the
victim and/or complainant was not sent.
Therefore, in such situation because of the
statutory provision, court has no option
except to issue notice to the complainant
and/or the victim. This will cause further
delay in disposal of Application u/s 482
which some times may result injustice to the
party who approach this court by filing
Application u/s 482 because during long
period, the applicant may be arrested or may
have faced continuous harassment on the part
of police authorities.

5. This court expressed displeasure over
the action of the police authorities for not
serving the notice upon the complainant or
the victim of POCSO Act. Despite the fact
that there is a specific rule, directing to the
police authorities to inform each and every
stage of the case including the bail
application to the victim and the complainant
of POCSO Act. Rule 4(15) of Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Rules, 2020
is being quoted as below:

"4(15). The information to be
provided by the SJPU, local police, or
support person, to the child and child's
parents or guardian or other person in whom
the child has trust and confidence, includes
but is not limited to the following:-

(i) the availability of public and
private emergency and crisis services;

(ii) the procedural steps involved in
a criminal prosecution;

(iii) the availability of victim's
compensation benefits;

(iv) the status of the investigation
of the crime, to the extent it is appropriate to
inform the victim and to the extent that it will
not interfere with the investigation;

(v) the arrest of a suspected
offender;

(vi) the filing of charges against a
suspected offender;

(vii)
the
schedule
of
court
proceedings that the child is either required
to attend or is entitled to attend;

(viii)
the
bail,
release
or
detention status of an offender or suspected
offender;
1278 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

(ix) the rendering of a verdict
after trial; and

(x) the sentence imposed on an
offender."

6. Similarly, Section 15-A of the
Scheduled Castes And The Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
also provides timely information to the
victim or his/her dependents regarding any
proceeding under the SC/ST Act. Sections
15-A(3), 15-A(5), 15-A(11) of the SC/ST
Act, 1989 are being quoted as below:

"15-A(3)
A
victim
or
his
dependent
shall
have
the
right
to
reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of
any Court proceeding including any bail
proceeding
and
the
Special
Public
Prosecutor or the State Government shall
inform the victim about any proceedings
under this Act.

(5) A victim or his dependent
shall be entitled to be heard at any
proceeding under this Act in respect of bail,
discharge, release, parole, conviction or
sentence of an accused or any connected
proceedings or arguments and file written
submission on conviction, acquittal or
sentencing.

(11) It shall be the duty of the
concerned State to specify an appropriate
scheme to ensure implementation of the
following rights and entitlements of victims
and witnesses in accessing justice so as-

(a) to provide a copy of the
recorded First Information Report at free of
cost;

(b) to provide immediate relief in
cash or in kind to atrocity victims or their
dependents;

(c)
to
provide
necessary
protection to the atrocity victims or their
dependents, and witnesses;

(d) to provide relief in respect of
death or injury or damage to property;

(e) to arrange food or water or
clothing or shelter or medical aid or
transport facilities or daily allowances to
victims;

(f) to provide the maintenance
expenses to the atrocity victims and their
dependents;

(g) to provide the information
about the rights of atrocity victims at the
time of making complaints and registering
the First Information Report;

(h) to provide the protection to
atrocity victims or their dependents and
witnesses
from
intimidation
and
harassment;

(i) to provide the information to
atrocity victims or their dependents or
associated organisations or individuals, on
the status of investigation and charge sheet
and to provide copy of the charge sheet at
free of cost;

(j) to take necessary precautions
at the time of medical examination;

(k) to provide information to
atrocity victims or their dependents or
associated organisations or individuals,
regarding the relief amount;

(l) to provide information to
atrocity victims or their dependents or
associated organisations or individuals, in
advance about the dates and place of
investigation and trial;

(m) to give adequate briefing on
the case and preparation for trial to
atrocity victims or their dependents or
associated organisations or individuals and
to provide the legal aid for the said
purpose;

(n) to execute the rights of
atrocity victims or their dependents or
associated organisations or individuals at
every stage of the proceedings under this
2 All. Rajendra Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1279
Act and to provide the necessary assistance
for the execution of the rights."

7. From the above provisions of the
POCSO Act as well as of the SC/ST Act, 1989,
it is clear that the victim or the complainant has
right to information about the pendency of any
proceeding in the respective acts and it is duty
of Investigating Officer, to inform them.

8. If on receiving the intimation from the
office of Government Advocate, High Court,
Allahabad, concerned police officer informs the
complainant and victim about the pendency of
case involving the offence under the POCSO
Act or SC/ST Act and submit its report along
with the instructions to the office of
Government Advocate, then it will save the
precious time for disposal of case and there will
be no requirement on the part of court to issue
notice to the victim and complainant at the time
of admission of case.

9. Therefore, this court directs the
Director General of Police, UP, Lucknow to
issue necessary direction to all the police
officials that whenever they receive any letter or
intimation from the office of Government
Advocate, High Court, Allahabad seeking
instructions regarding the cases involving
offence under the POCSO Act or SC/ST Act,
then the concerned police officer before sending
instructions to the High Court must intimate to
the complainant/victim about the pendency of
case before the High Court and there should be
endorsement
of
complainant
or
victim
regarding service of that notice or intimation,
which should be forwarded to the office of
Government Advocate, High Court, Allahabad
along with instructions.

10. Registrar (Compliance) is directed to
send copy of this order to the Director General
of Police,
 UP, Lucknow for necessary compliance.

11. Issue notice to opposite party no.2.
----------
(2024) 2 ILRA 1279
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 25.01.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH
DESHWAL, J.

Application u/s 482 No. 45953 of 2023

Rajendra ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opp. Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Sunil Kumar, Sri Chandan Singh, Sri Narendra
Singh

Counsel for the Opp. Parties:
G.A.

Criminal Law - Criminal Procedure Code,
1973 - Sections 161 & 482 - Negotiable
Instruments Act, 188 - Sections 94, 138
& 142(1)(b) - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 -
Sections 65-B & 114 - Information
Technology Act, 2000 - Sections 2(1)(r),
4, 12 & 13 - General Clauses Act, 1977 -
Section 27 - Application u/s 482 - for quashing
the summoning order as well as the entire
criminal proceedings - cheque dishonour case -
complaint case - Summoning order - question
of law - maintainability of premature complaint
case - applicant contended that the complaint
was premature, having been filed before the
mandatory 15-day period post service of notice
had lapsed, and further argued that the absence
of a specific service date rendered the complaint
defective - court, relying on the Supreme
Court's ruling in C.C. Alavi Haji, held that service
of notice sent via registered post to the correct
address can be presumed under Section 27 of
the General Clauses Act and Section 114 of the
Evidence Act, and that the complaint need not
explicitly mention the date of service - The court
also recognized electronic modes of service such
as email and WhatsApp as valid under Sections