Raj Singh @ Krishan Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others

Ravindra Maithani, J

The instant petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR No.331 of

2020 dated 07.12.2020, under Sections 376 and 506 IPC, lodged by respondent no.3 at P.S. Nanakmatta, District-Udham Singh Nagar and a

mandamus commanding / directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in connection with the impugned FIR.

Facts necessary for disposal of this petition, briefly stated, are as hereunder:-

According to the FIR, the informant, who is respondent no.3 herein is married, having two children and was staying happily with her husband. On

06.03.2017 when the informant was all alone in her house at 10:00 p.m. late evening, the petitioner entered the house and raped her and also

threatened her to life, in case, she reveals it to anyone. The informant revealed it to her husband when he returned, but the husband of informant

expelled her from his house. The informant went to her father’s house, but they also did not allow her to stay with them. The informant started

staying in a rented accommodation. There again under the pretext of marriage the petitioner established physical relations with her. When the

informant objected to it, the petitioner threatened to make her intimate video and photographs viral.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is no medical examination report of the informant; the FIR has been lodged after three

years of the incident; the petitioner is a minor; his age is 17 years only. It is also argued that the parties have entered into a compromise. When the

Court questioned, as to how an FIR of such a nature can be quashed on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the

informant has herself given an affidavit that under some wrong impression she lodged the report. Reference has been made to annexure-4 to the

petition, which is, in fact, leveled as a compromise, signed by both the informant and the petitioner.

This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The FIR is categorical. It levels allegation of rape against the petitioner. The first

incidence allegedly occurred on 06.03.2017 and according to the FIR, on 01.12.2020 also the petitioner established physical relations with the

informant. The FIR, discloses commission of offences. What is the reliability and credibility of the material, these are the subject which falls for

consideration of the Investigating Officer.

If petitioner is a child, what would be the procedure it also falls for consideration of the Investigating Officer. Whether in the instant case, the

provision of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 shall be applicable? This Court cannot make any observation at this stage.

As stated, it is also subject to scrutiny during investigation.

Strangely enough along with the instant petition, a compromise has been filed signed by the petitioner and the informant. Who approached the

informant and why she was approached. Even this Court is informed that today the informant is before the Court. Who has called her and why has

she been called. Is she been pressurized by the petitioner to file compromise? This Court also does not want to record any finding on this aspect.

Whether the FIR is false or correct or has been wrongly lodged by the informant, it is for the Investigating Officer to look into those aspects and if the

FIR is false definitely the Investigating Officer will also consider to proceed against the person who lodged the false FIR. According to FIR, it is a

case of rape, not once but repeatedly.

Having considered the all aspects of this matter, this Court is of the view that there is no reason to make any interference, therefore, the petition is

dismissed accordingly.