Allahabad High Court Upholds Addition of Section 376 I.P.C. Charge in Immoral Traffic Case
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Justice Dinesh Pathak, dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the addition of a charge under Section 376 I.P.C. against the applicant, Om Prakash @ Jani, in a case related to the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
The case, originally filed under various sections of the I.P.C. and the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, took a pivotal turn when the prosecution moved to add a charge of rape under Section 376 I.P.C. against the applicant. This move was contested by the defense, citing procedural irregularities and lack of material evidence.
Justice Pathak, in his detailed judgment, stated, “The right of an accused to have a fair trial… cannot be seen in isolation and same would be considered in conjunction with the provisions as enunciated under Section 216 Cr.P.C.” This observation underscores the court’s commitment to ensuring a fair and comprehensive legal process.
The court delved into the nuances of Section 216 of the Cr.P.C., which empowers a court to alter or add charges at any stage of the trial. Emphasizing the role of the prosecution and the court in framing correct charges, Justice Pathak noted, “The Public Prosecutor has a duty to be vigilant and apprise the court qua correct facts of the case… for substraction or addition of charges under the provisions of law.”
The applicant’s claims about the inadmissibility of the victim’s statement and other procedural lapses were carefully examined. The court found these submissions to be unfounded, reaffirming the trial court’s decision to frame the additional charge.
This ruling sets a precedent in how courts handle the addition of charges in ongoing cases, especially in sensitive matters involving the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. The decision highlights the judiciary’s role in balancing the rights of the accused with the imperatives of justice and due process.
The case has been referred back to the trial court for further proceedings, ensuring that all necessary legal protocols are meticulously followed.
The legal fraternity views this judgment as a reaffirmation of the court’s authority and responsibility in ensuring justice is served, in accordance with the law, without prejudice to any party involved.
Date on 22 December, 2023
Om Prakash @ Jani vs State Of U.P
