VIRI SINGH AND 4 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

    HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

          CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2746 of 2026



Viri Singh And 4 Others
                                                   .....Revisionist(s)
                              Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                       .....Opposite
                                                             Party(s)

Counsel for Revisionist(s)             :   Binod Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)          :   G.A.

Court No. - 86

       HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists as well as learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present criminal revision has been filed with prayer to set
aside the impugned judgment and order dated 09.02.2026 passed
by learned Special Judge (Rape and POCSO Act),
First/Additional Session Judge, Etah in Session Cas No.897 of
2023 (State vs. Shahbaz Khan @ Sonu and others) arising out of
Case Crime NO.370 of 2022, under Sections 147, 323, 354, 504
I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat,
District Etah.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionists that in this
case an application for discharge was moved before the learned
trial court which was dismissed by order dated 09.02.2026 and
formal charge was framed on the same day. Further submitted
that a case was got registered against the informant by the
revisionists that was the reason present F.I.R. was lodged with
false allegation in counter-blast. The revisionists filed an
application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.26192 of 2023 which was decided
by this Court on 11.08.2023 and no remedy was granted in their
favour. During the course of investigation, the statements of
victim u/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded before the I.O. and
                                                    CRLR No. 2746 of 2026
                           2


the learned Magistrate in which she made allegations but there
are material discrepancies which made her statements unreliable.
All these facts were not taken into consideration by the learned
trial court while deciding the application for discharge, therefore,
the learned trial court has committed error in passing the order in
question which is liable to be set aside and application for
discharge to be allowed while allowing this revision.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended
that in this case all these facts have already been raised before
this Court while arguing the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C.
No.26192 of 2023 in which this Court has found that as per the
contents of F.I.R. as well as statements of the victim, prima facie
cognizable offence is made out against the applicants/revisionists
that was the reason the remedy was refused and application was
dismissed by order dated 11.08.2023. At this stage of framing of
charge, learned trial court is to consider the material collected
during the course of investigation to find out prima faice case and
not to make scrutiny of the material as during the course of trial.
He also contends that once formal charge is being framed and it
can not be deleted. Learned trial court has not committed any
error in passing the order in question.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions
made by learned counsel for the revisionists as well as learned
A.G.A., the contents of F.I.R., the statements of the victim as
recorded u/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. before the I.O. and learned
Magistrate, the order passed by the learned trial court dated
09.02.2026 and also the formal charge being framed by the
learned trial court, it transpires that after perusing the material
collected during the course of investigation the learned trial court
has passed the order in question and also framed the charge for
molestation and under POCSO Act against the revisionists
Shahbaz Khan @ Sonu & Pravesh Kumar and against others
under Section 147, 323/34, 504 I.P.C. after considering the entire
statement of the victim. While deciding the application u/s 482
Cr.P.C. moved by the same revisionists this Court has considered
the material elaborately and found out that, prima facie,
cognizable offence is made out against the revisionists that was
                                                                                            CRLR No. 2746 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                        the reason remedy was refused. At the stage of framing of charge,
                                        the learned trial court is expected to make scrutiny of the material
                                        only with a view to find out the prima facie case and scrutiny is
                                        not to be made as during the course of trial. After framing of
                                        formal charge it cannot be deleted but it may either result in
                                        conviction or acquittal though the learned trial court has power
                                        u/s 216 Cr.P.C./239 B.N.S.S. either to add or alter the charge.
                                        There appears no any illegality or impropriety in the order dated
                                        09.02.2026 passed by the learned trial court but this revision
                                        being devoid of merit is liable to be dismissed.

                                        Accordingly, this criminal revision is dismissed at the admission
                                        stage itself.


                                        May 5, 2026
                                        Ashok Gupta
                                                                          (Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad