Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Tarun Jit Tejpal, filed a Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the order dated 07/09/2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa, framing charges against him under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 341, 342, 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(k) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The case arises from allegations of sexual assault made by a female colleague during a literary festival in Goa. The applicant contended that the CCTV footage, which showed the victim leaving the elevator and walking normally, contradicted her statement and should have been considered by the trial court to conclude that no prima facie case existed. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant argued that the trial court erred in not appreciating the CCTV footage, which was the best evidence, and that the victim's conduct after the alleged incident was inconsistent with her claims. The Special Public Prosecutor for the State supported the impugned order, submitting that the trial court had correctly applied the law regarding framing of charges and that the CCTV footage did not disprove the allegations, as the offences allegedly occurred inside a room not covered by CCTV. The High Court, after hearing both sides, held that at the stage of framing charge, the court is only required to see whether there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused, and not to weigh the evidence meticulously. The court noted that the victim's statement under Section 164 CrPC and other materials on record provided a prima facie case for the offences charged. The CCTV footage, while relevant, did not conclusively negate the allegations, as it only showed the victim's movements in common areas and not what transpired inside the room. The court found no illegality or perversity in the trial court's order and dismissed the revision application, upholding the framing of charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Framing of Charge - Prima Facie Case - Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC - The court examined whether the trial court correctly framed charges based on material on record. Held that at the stage of framing charge, the court need only see if there is sufficient ground to proceed, not whether the evidence is sufficient for conviction. The CCTV footage does not conclusively disprove the victim's statement, and the trial court's order was not perverse or illegal. (Paras 1-27) B) Indian Penal Code - Sexual Offences - Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 376(2)(f), 376(2)(k) IPC - The court considered whether the allegations of sexual assault, including rape and criminal force with intent to disrobe, were supported by prima facie evidence. Held that the victim's statement under Section 164 CrPC and other materials provide sufficient grounds to frame charges. The CCTV footage showing the victim leaving the elevator does not negate the possibility of the alleged offences occurring inside the room. (Paras 2-27) C) Indian Penal Code - Wrongful Restraint and Confinement - Sections 341, 342 IPC - The court examined whether the allegations of wrongful restraint and confinement were made out. Held that the victim's statement that she was prevented from leaving the room and was confined therein constitutes prima facie material for these charges. The CCTV footage does not show the entire sequence of events inside the room. (Paras 2-27)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Additional Sessions Judge erred in framing charges against the applicant under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 341, 342, 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(k) IPC, and whether the CCTV footage disproves the allegations at the stage of framing of charge.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the Criminal Revision Application, upholding the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mapusa, dated 07/09/2017, framing charges against the applicant under Sections 354, 354A, 354B, 341, 342, 376(2)(f) and 376(2)(k) IPC.
Law Points
- Framing of charge requires only prima facie case
- not proof beyond reasonable doubt
- CCTV footage cannot override victim's statement at charge stage
- Sections 354
- 354A
- 354B
- 341
- 342
- 376(2)(f)
- 376(2)(k) IPC
- Section 397 r/w 401 CrPC
