Innocent Horo @ Annecent Horo vs State Of Jharkhand

Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J

Learned counsel for the parties are present.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by the impugned order, charge has been altered materially and section 376(D) of IPC and also section 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences, Act (POCSO Act) has been added. Learned counsel for the petitioners while referring to Section 216(4) has submitted that the alteration of charge has prejudiced the petitioners and therefore the court ought to have directed for a new trial and there was no occasion to proceed with the trial which was for the alleged offence under Section 366-A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and alternatively under Sections 17 and 18 of the POCSO Act. The learned counsel while referring to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. has submitted that it was never the case of the prosecution that rape was committed upon the victim.

Counsel for the petitioners is directed to add the informant of the case as opposite party No. 2 who is said to be the father of the victim.

Let the name of opposite party No. 2 be concealed while uploading the order of this court.

Counsel for the State is directed to serve notice to the informant of the case and file affidavit regarding service of notice.

Counsel for the State is also directed to file counter affidavit in this case.

Post this case on 21.08.2024 under the heading for ‘Orders’ in the supplementary cause list.

Office is directed to call for the present status of the case from the court concerned.

Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through FAX.