Allahabad High Court
Manoj Kumar @ Manuj vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. ... on 23 June, 2021
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Ved Prakash Vaish
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 12649 of 2021
Petitioner :- Manoj Kumar @ Manuj
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. & Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Aditya Narayan Yadav,Harish Chandra Yadav
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Ved Prakash Vaish,J.
The Court has convened through Video Conferencing.
Heard Shri Aditya Narayan Yadav, Advocate assisted by Shri Siddhartha Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Roohi Siddiqui, learned AGA for the State-respondent nos.1 and 2.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, seeking quashing of the impugned F.I.R. dated 19.08.2020 registered as Case Crime No.149 of 2020 under Sections 376-D, 323, 506 IPC at police station Asoha, District Unnao with a further prayer to stay the arrest of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner no.1 along with his brother, co-accused Amit, have been implicated in the present case for committing rape of daughter of respondent no.3 and the father of the petitioner (co-accused Sarju Prasad) is also implicated in the present case as he is said to have assaulted the wife of respondent no.3. He further argued that it is highly improbable and beyond imagination that the petitioner along with his brother would commit rape on the daughter of respondent no.3 and their father would assault the wife of respondent no.3, hence, the present FIR has been lodged by respondent no.3 against the petitioner, his brother and their father just for harassment and with oblique motive. Thus, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for quashing of the First Information Report and submitted that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner in the impugned FIR and stated that as per statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. allegation of rape has been levelled against the petitioner and his brother, but there was no allegation of rape against his father. He further submitted that victim has sustained injuries though no injury report has been annexed, thus, the relief as claimed by the petitioners in this writ petition cannot be granted in view of the latest judgment of the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.330 of 2021 (M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. The State of Maharashtra and others), and therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
After having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned FIR, we are of the opinion that the impugned FIR discloses cognizable offence against the petitioner that he along with his brother (co-accused) committed rape with the daughter of respondent no.3, as is apparent from the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., hence, no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the FIR or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner and also in view of the law laid down in M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide judgment and order dated 13.04.2021 the present writ petition is dismissed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Ved Prakash Vaish, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 23.6.2021
Arnima
