Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17452 of 2021
Applicant :- Kamlesh And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Bahadur Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Trivedi
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 07.10.2020 passed by learned Special Judge (P.O.C.S.O. Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Kannauj in Complaint Case No. 25/2020 & S.S.T. No.
256 /2021 (Upasana v. Ram Babu & others) under Section 376D, 506, 120-B of I.P.C. and Section 16/17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Kannauj, District Kannauj pending before the learned Special Judge POCSO Act, Kannauj and also the entire criminal proceeding in pursuance of the complaint dated 12.02.2020 filed by opposite party no. 2 and exonerate the applicants, with a further prayer to stay further proceeding in the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case; they are innocent persons. The allegation made by the victim is that the applicants committed rape upon her when she was guarding her field. It is further submitted that a property dispute is pending between the parties and just to create pressure upon the applicant, this false case has been slapped against the applicants. No offence is made out against the applicant under aforementioned sections, hence this petition.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of quashing and submitted that disputed question of facts have been raised by learned counsel for the applicant which are beyond the scope in proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Perusal of the record reveals that after recording the statements of witnesses under Section 200 & 202 Cr.P.C. in the complaint, the learned Magistrate passed the summoning order. In the proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the truthfulness or otherwise of statements of witnesses cannot be adjudicated upon.
Maharastra and others, 2020 SCC Online SC 850, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:
"iv) The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly with circumspection, as it has been observed, in the rarest of rare case (not to be confused with the formation in the context of death penalty).
v) While examining an FIR/complaint, quashing of which is sought, the court cannot embark upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR/complaint;
vi) Criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage;
vii) Quashing of a complaint/FIR should be an exception rather than an ordinary rule."
Following other authorities can be cited on the aforesaid point:
R. P. Kapur vs. The State Of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and others, AIR 1992 SC 604.
The Hon'ble Apex Court has held that High Court cannot embark upon the enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the F.I.R./complaint.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.
Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.9.2021 VPS
Digitally signed by ANIL KUMAR OJHA Date: 2021.10.01 14:46:29 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad