Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Devak Vardhan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondents and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- Ramapati @ Bachcha Sharma, seeking a writ of certioari seeking quashing of the impugned F.I.R. dated 24.04.2021 lodged by complainant/respondent No.3 registered as Case Crime/F.I.R. No.197 of 2021, under Section 354 I.P.C., Section 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Raniganj, District Pratapgarh and also issue a writ of mandamus directing 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 there was civil litigation going on between the parties, on account of which, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case with malafide intention. He further submits that petitioner was not even present at the date and time of the incident, as he was at the engagement ceremony programme of his niece- Km. Pooja Sharma. In this regard, he annexed the engagement invitation card and some photographs in Annexure No.8 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 A.G.A., on the other hand, 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 victim is a minor girl aged about 12 years as is evident from the impugned F.I.R. and allegation of molestation has been levelled against the petitioner. 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