Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/339/2022 on 14 March, 2022
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
14.03.2022 WPCRL No. 339 of 2022
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.
This Criminal Writ Petition has been
filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to issue a writ of certiorari to quash
the First Information Report No.0031 of
2022, registered with Police Station
Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar for
the offence under Sections 376 and 506 of
the IPC; a writ of mandamus directing the
respondent no.2 not to arrest the petitioner
in connection with the impugned First
Information Report.
Heard Mr. T.A. Khan, the learned
Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Vinay
Bhatt, the learned counsel for the petitioner,
Mr. S.S. Adhikari, the learned Deputy
Advocate General for the State and Mr. D.N.
Sharma, the learned counsel for the
respondent no.3.
Mr. T.A. Khan, the learned Senior
Advocate appearing for the petitioner
submitted that there was only friendship
between the petitioner and the respondent
no.3. He submitted that the petitioner has
been falsely implicated. The informant/
respondent no.3, was a consenting party.
He has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Sonu alias Subhash
Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and
Another, (2021) SCC OnLine SC 181,
Maheshwar Tigga vs. State of
Jharkhand, (2020) 10 SCC 108, Pramod
Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of
Maharashtra and Another, (2019) 9
SCC 608, Shivashankar alias Shiva vs.
State of Karnataka and Another, (2019)
18 SCC 204 and a judgment, passed in
Criminal Appeal No.1443 of 2018, "Dr.
Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar vs. The
State of Maharashtra & Others", by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 22.11.2018.
On the other hand, Mr. S.S. Adhikari,
the learned Deputy Advocate General
appearing for the State and Mr. D.N.
Sharma, the learned counsel appearing for
the respondent no.3 - victim opposed the
contentions of the learned Senior Advocate
appearing for the petitioner and submitted
that during the course of the investigation,
evidence, regarding the involvement of the
present petitioner, has been found.
Statements, under Section 161 and 164 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, of
the victim have been recorded. She
supported the case. It is specifically stated
in the First Information Report that on
28.11.2021, she was raped by the present
petitioner. The Investigating Officer has
collected the register of the said hotel,
where the rape was committed. They relied
upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court
in Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs.
State of Maharashtra and Others,
(2021) SCC OnLine SC 315.
The learned counsel appearing for the
State and the private respondent no.3 -
victim requested two weeks' time to file
counter affidavits.
In the facts and circumstances of this
case, it seems appropriate to give an
opportunity of being heard to the
respondents also, even before passing any
order on the Interim Relief Application.
List this case on 31.03.2022.
The counter affidavits be filed
meanwhile, positively.
(Alok Kumar Verma, J.)
14.03.2022
Pant/
