Sandeep vs State of Uttarakhand & Ors

LOK PAL SINGH, J.

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned FIR dated 7.6.2018 registered as Case Crime/FIR No.0162 of 2018

u/s 376 of IPC at Police Station Raipur, District Dehradun as against the petitioner.

ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 to not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the FIR dated

7.6.2018 registered as Case Crime/FIR No.0162 of 2018 u/s 376 of IPC at Police Station Raipur District Dehradun.

Allegations in the F.I.R. are that the prosecutrix is a married woman having two kids. Her husband has left her. The complainant on the promise

that he would marry her and adopt her children, establish physical relations with her. After one year, when the prosecutrix asked the petitioner for

marriage, he used abusive language and refused to do marriage.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that no case u/s 376 of IPC is made out against the petitioner as the prosecutrix was a consenting

party. According to learned counsel, petitioner has been falsely implicated in the said case. To buttress his argument, learned counsel for the petitioner

has placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana, reported in (2013) 7

SCC 675.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the earlier marriage of the prosecutrix is still in existence as no decree of divorce has

been obtained by either of the parties as such there was no occasion for the petitioner to marry with respondent no.3.

I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the contents of the F.I.R. Contents of the F.I.R.

prima facie disclose commission of offence but whether the facts mentioned in the F.I.R. are correct or not, is a matter of investigation. It is for the

Investigating Officer to conduct investigation in accordance with law so as to reach to a logical conclusion. In my opinion, it is not a fit case where the

Court should interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

For the reasons recorded above, writ petition lacks merit and the same is hereby dismissed. [Stay application CLMA No. 8853 of 2018 also stands

dismissed].