Criminal Misc. Writ Petition filed to quash FIR under IPC and POCSO Acts. Court noted victim is a minor but found no ground to quash, declining to express opinion on merits and dismissing petition while leaving bail application open.
Writ petition dismissed; leave granted to petitioner to apply for bail from competent court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5952 of 2021
Petitioner :- Mohd. Nafees Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohd. Afzal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A.
This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
"i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned first information report dated 20.3.2021 registered as Case Crime No. 137 of 2021 under sections 363, 506, 376 and 342 of I.P.C. and section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Najibabad, District Bijnor. (Annexure 1 to the writ petition.
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance to the impugned FIR and not adopt any coercive action against the petitioner."
As per impugned first information report version, the victim is aged about 15 years and she is a student of Class IX. In paragraph 7 of the writ petition it has been stated that as per Class VII marks-sheet of the victim, her date of birth is 1.2.2005, thus her age appears to be about 16 years. Thus, prima facie, the victim appears to be minor. In her statement under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that when the accused Sajid brought the victim back to Najibabad then his father hidden her in a room and on the next date the accused Sajid has left her at bus station. Thus, role of hiding is assigned to the petitioner. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 and M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR OnLine 2021 SC 192, we do not find any good reason to quash the impugned first information report.
In view of the aforesaid and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case of the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to apply before the competent court for bail as permissible under law and in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 5.8.2021
samz
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is any good reason to quash the FIR under sections 363, 506, 376, 342 IPC and POCSO Act given the victim is a minor.
Whether the writ petition should allow the petitioner to raise bail application instead.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and othersReferred¶9
State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajan Lal and others, 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 · Who else cites this
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of MaharashtraReferred¶9
M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR OnLine 2021 SC 192 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohd. Nafees
State Of U P
3 Others
Surya Prakash Kesarwani
Piyush Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
