Dismissed

Mohammad Akil Quraishi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2019A482/27709/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIR involving rape and unnatural offences, the court held that disputed facts could not be adjudicated at this stage as a prima facie case was made out. The prayer for quashing was refused, and the trial court was directed to decide a potential discharge application within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for quashing the proceedings was refused. A direction was issued to the trial court to decide the discharge application within 30 days if moved.

Mohammad Akil Quraishi Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27709 of 2019 Applicant :- Mohammad Akil Quraishi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Kumar,A Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.

¶4

Heard Sri A. Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.A. Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶5

This Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding of S.T. No. 22/2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 227/2018 U/s 376 and 328 I.P.C., P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District- Chitrakoot.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the accused applicant is a Junior Engineer who has been falsely implicated in this case by the opposite party No. 2 only with a view to create pressure upon him so that he would marry her; the allegation which has been narrated in the F.I.R., is false. The accused applicant is posted in Chitrakoot while, opposite party No. 2 belongs to Banda and she never came to Chitrakoot. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that accused applicant never established any physical relationship with the victim nor he has ever administered any noxious substance of any kind in any of the drink which was alleged to be administered to her. In statement of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. there are huge discrepancies found with respect to the manner of occurrence; no specific dates have been given by the victim as to when the occurrence had taken place, hence it is nothing but malicious prosecution in which charge-sheet needs to be quashed. Learned counsel for the applicant also apprised that the accused has already been bailed out.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the quashing of the proceedings and has drawn attention of the Court towards page no. 111 of the paper book in which mother of the victim has supported the prosecution case and even the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has fully supported the prosecution version and stated that she was raped by the accused applicant which cannot be disbelieved at this stage in proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶8

I have gone through the F.I.R. and as per F.I.R., the marriage of the victim was fixed with the accused applicant and some

¶9

formalities were also completed. The accused had provided a mobile phone also to the victim by which he used to talk to her for long duration; the applicant continued to establish physical relationship with the victim under the impression that he would marry her. In August, 2017, the victim was called by the accused applicant in Karwi and there, she was given some noxious substance in the drink, thereafter she was sexually exploited for the whole night. After investigation made by the police in the present case, charge-sheet has been submitted against the accused applicant and the statements which have been recorded by the I.O. under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim cannot be scrutinized in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶10

From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of this case, at this stage, it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings u/s 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of 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, State of Bihar and Anr. Vs. P.P. Sharma, AIR 1991 SC 1260 lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Md. Sharaful Haque and Ors., AIR 2005 SC 9 . The disputed defense of the accused cannot be considered at this stage.

¶11

The prayer for quashing the proceedings is refused.

¶12

The trial court is directed to decide the discharge application within 30 days from today, if such an application is moved by the accused applicant.

¶13

With the above direction, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.7.2019 AS Rathor

Mohammad Akil Quraishi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Akil Quraishi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeev Kumar (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Amit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kallu @ Narendra Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tarnnum Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Man Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lavkush Mishra @ Vineet Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another