Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Ram Sagar Mirdha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Narvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.4, Smt. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State/respondents no.1 to 3 and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Arvind Kumar Mishra, seeking a writ of certioari to quash the impugned F.I.R. dated 02.08.2021 registered as F.I.R. No.0317/2021, under Sections 354, 376, 384, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow and also issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the impugned F.I.R.
It has been argued by learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner is 63 years old person and retired from Vigilance Department. He further submits that petitioner is suffering from several diseases and he is not in a position to commit the alleged offence. In this regard, he has annexed the medical treatment of petitioner in Annexure No.10 to the writ petition. He further submits that the victim/prosecutrix is his sister-in-law (sali) and she was a Teacher in Basic Education Department and was dismissed from service on the ground that she obtained her appointment on the basis of forged academic record, a copy of dismissal order passed by B.S.A, Lucknow is annexed as Annexure No.3 to the writ petition. He further submits that private respondent requested the petitioner to help out in her dismissal to get her reinstated which was refused by the petitioner, on account of which, the impugned F.I.R. has been lodged by private respondent with malafide intention. He further submits that alleged incident of committing rape of the victim is 5 years prior to lodging of the impugned F.I.R. Moreover, the second incident dated 01.07.2021 is just to give a serious colour to the incident for threatening her. He further submits that the petitioner was not present at the date and time of the incident, as he was present at his residence. In this regard, he has annexed the photographs of CCTV camera footage in Annexure No.4 to the writ petition.
Lastly, the submission of learned counsel for petitioner is that impugned F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner just for harassment and with oblique motive, hence the impugned F.I.R. is liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for private respondent opposed the prayer for quashing of the impugned F.I.R. and submitted that on 20.07.2021, private respondent had made a complaint against the petitioner to Hon'ble the President of India, a copy of same is annexed as Annexure No.9 to the writ petition. He further submits that so far as the delay in lodging the F.I.R. is concerned, it is submitted that complainant being a helpless woman was being exploited and threatened by the petitioner.
Learned A.G.A., on the other hand, also opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. and submitted that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. She further submits that specific allegation of committing rape and blackmailing of private respondent has been levelled against the petitioner. It has further been alleged in the impugned F.I.R. that the petitioner on the basis of indecent photographs of private respondent used to extort money from her and also threatened her. She further submits that the plea of alibi cannot be examined by this Court in a writ petition as the same can be adjudged during the course of trial on the basis of the evidence adduced by the petitioner and also the impugned F.I.R. discloses a cognizable offence against the petitioner, and therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
Having examined the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, perusing the impugned F.I.R., which shows that cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner, we are of the opinion that no interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the F.I.R. or for grant of any interim relief to the petitioner.
The petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Saroj Yadav,J.) (Ramesh Sinha,J.) Order Date :- 24.8.2021 Shubhankar