Rahul @ Prince Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Order Reserved On:29.11.2023 Order Delivered On:15.12.2023 Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41501 of 2023 Applicant :- Rahul @ Prince Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Rai,Sandeep Maniji Bakhshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2This application under section under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the cognizance order dated 08.09.2023 passed in Criminal Case No. 28247 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 42 of 2023, under sections 366, 328, 342, 376-D, 406, 323, 370 IPC, Police Station Jogiya Udaipur, District Siddhartha Nagar.

¶3As per the allegation made in the first information report, it is alleged that on 28.02.2023 in the night hours her daughter had left the house without informing the inmates and in respect of her untraceability information was given in the police station on 03.03.2023, however, on 07.04.2023 in the night, she has returned back and informed that applicant and two others have enticed her away and had forcibly detained her in their house and thereafter taken her to Mumbai from where some how she escaped from their clutches and returned back. On the basis of said information, an FIR was lodged vide Case Crime No. 42 of 2023, under sections 366 IPC.

¶4After registration of FIR the police conducted the investigation and recorded the statement of the victim under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. in which it has been categorically stated that the applicant had forcibly taken her away and thereafter committed rape on her. Even in the statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. said allegation has been reiterated.

¶5After concluding the investigation, the police has submitted the chargesheet against the applicant and on the basis of said chargesheet, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance and summoned the applicant to face trial vide order dated 08.09.2023.

¶6Being aggrieved and dis-satisfied by the said order

08.09.2023 the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed.

¶7Learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that there is vital delay in lodging the first information report and therefore, the entire proceedings based on the charge sheet is wholly illegal based on malafide and as such liable to be quashed.

¶8Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that in the FIR there is no allegation of committing rape upon the victim, however, subsequently in the statement recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. said allegations of commission of offence of rape have been reiterated just to falsely implicate him and to drag him in criminal case. It is further submitted that the applicant was not present at the time of incident and has been falsely implicated just to wreak vengeance. It is further submitted that medical report does not corroborate the prosecution story, as such entire proceedings may be quashed.

¶9Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the said prayer and has supported the impugned order summoning the applicant to face the trial under sections 366, 328, 342, 376-D, 406, 323, 370 IPC. He has further drawn the attention of the court to the statement of the victim recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and has submitted that from the allegation made therein prima facie offence under sections 366, 328, 342, 376-D, 406, 323, 370 IPC is clearly disclosed against the applicant and chargesheet as well as entire proceeding can not be quashed. Moreso, when the entire evidence is yet to come.

¶10He has further submitted that the plea of alibi taken by the counsel for the applicant at this stage can not be considered. The disputed defence can not be looked into at this stage as held by the Hon. Apex Court in several of its decisions. Thus, the entire proceedings based on the charge sheet can not be quashed at this stage.

11.Having considered the rival submissions made by the parties and taking into consideration, the allegation made in FIR and material collected during the course of investigation by the police and considering the statements of the victim recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. prima facie offence against the applicant is clearly made out at this stage, as such the entire proceeding can not be quashed. Moreso, when the entire evidence is yet to come.

¶12Thus from the perusal of the material available on record and looking into facts of the case at this stage, it can not be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which can not be adjudicated upon by this court under section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶13At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by the Apex court in the case of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P. Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another, (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283.

¶14In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the impugned charge sheet, cognizance order as well as the entire proceedings is therefore refused.

¶15The present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 15.12.2023 RPD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad