- (1.) These two revisions are directed against the common order dated 27.2.2017 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act Cases cum SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Sriganganagar in Sessions Case No.111/2016 (107/2016) whereby the application filed by the respondent victim under Section 193 Cr.P.C. was accepted and the petitioners Sita and Bhanwar Lal were summoned as additional accused to face trial with the charge-sheeted accused to face trial for the offences under Sections 363 , 366 , 376D read with 34 I.P.C . and 5/6 of POCSO Act.
(2.) Facts in brief are that the respondent complainant Sushri 'M' aged 16 years lodged a complaint in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Anoopgarh which was forwarded to the P.S. Anoopgarh under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. where F.I.R. No.141/2015 came to be registered on 3.4.2015 for the offences under Sections 363 , 366 and 376D I.P.C. and 5/6 of the POCSO Act. The victim alleged in the complaint that she had gone to attend a relative's marriage on 27.3.2015 at the Chak 2NSM. A Rati Joga (all night chanting) was being organised in the wedding celebrations and as such, she was awake till late. The accused Sita called on the complainant's brother's phone and requested her to come out of the house for meeting her. She asked Sita to come in and talk but Sita insisted that she should come out. Upon this, the complainant came out of the house. Shankar Lal, Radheyshyam, Sita and an unknown person were waiting outside on two motorcycles. Shankar Lal forcibly pulled her on to his motorcycle and gagged her mouth. She was threatened that if she raised a hue and cry, then she would be killed. She was taken into an abandoned Dhani where some spray bottles and a cot were lying. At the Dhani, Sita administered some intoxicant mixed in water to the victim and told that she should satisfy her brother's lust and that he would marry her later. The victim protested but Sita insisted that she would have to marry Shankar Lal. She was also threatened that she would be defiled so badly that she would not be able to show her face in the society again and would have to beg to marry Shankar Lal. Saying so, Sita went out. Shankar Lal took the victim inside a room and subjected her to rape while Radheyshyam gagged her mouth. Thereafter, Shankar Lal held her down and Radheyshyam raped her. The third male accused and Sita kept vigil outside the Kotha. Thereafter, the victim was again boarded on to the motorcycle and was dropped outside her relative's house. She raised a hue and cry whereupon, her relatives came out and on seeing them, the accused abandoned one motorcycle outside the house and escaped. A Panchayat was convened. Fearing recrimination of the incident, Shankar Lal committed suicide. The matter was reported to the Police, but no action was forthcoming. Thus, a complaint was filed in the Court. Soon after filing the complaint, the victim submitted an application stating therein that she did not desire registration of the case under the POCSO Act. The Court accepted the said prayer and deleted these offences. The complaint was sent to the Police Station Anoopgarh under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. where, an F.I.R. No.141/2015 was registered and investigation was commenced. Statements of the victim were recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. In both these statements, the victim improved upon her story as set out in the written complaint and named Bhanwar Lal as the fourth man, whose name, she did not mention as an accused in the written complaint. The allegation of rape was specifically levelled against Radheyshyam and Shankar Lal. The Investigating Agency, proceeded to file charge-sheet only against the accused Radheyshyam because Shankar Lal the second assailant had committed suicide in the intervening period. The petitioners Bhanwar Lal and Sita were not found involved in the alleged incident and accordingly, a negative Final Report was submitted qua them. The victim, upon being apprised of this partial charge- sheet filed only against the accused Radheyshyam, submitted an application under Section 193 Cr.P.C. before the learned Special Court and prayed that the accused Sita and Bhanwar Lal may also be summoned to face trial alongwith the charge-sheeted accused. The learned Special Judge proceeded to accept the application and directed summoning of the present petitioners as additional accused in the case for the above offences by the impugned order dated 27.2.2017, which is assailed in these two revisions.
(3.) Shri B.S.Rathore learned counsel representing the petitioners relied upon a Single Bench decision of this Court in the case of Bagh Singh & Anr. Vs. The State of Rajasthan reported in 1985 Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 417 and urged that the learned Special Judge had already taken cognizance against the accused Radheyshyam against whom, the Police had filed a charge-sheet. As per him, the learned trial court could not take cognizance second time around in the same case. He thus craved acceptance of the revisions urging that the impugned order is bad in the eye of law and should be quashed.;