Dismissed

Anshul Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 May 2025A482/44019/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of trial proceedings for gang rape and SC/ST Act offences, citing lack of injuries and corroboration and vague FIR allegations. The court held the victim's Section 164 statement supported the prosecution, disputes were factual matters for trial, and dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

What the court decided

AI extract

Anshul Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88296

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44019 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Anshul Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sukesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.1058 of 2024, titled State v. Sunder and others, arising out of Case Crime No.218 of 2024, under Sections 376D, 323, 406, 504, 506, 328 IPC and Sections 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Etawah.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has no concerned with the alleged offence. It is contended that the medical examination of the prosecutrix, who is stated to be approximately 50 years of age, does not reveal any external or internal injuries on her body, thereby casting serious doubt on the veracity of the allegations made against the applicant. Furthermore, it is submitted that there is an absolute lack of corroborative evidence in the form of independent witnesses to the alleged incident, and the Investigating Officer has not examined any material witnesses in support of the prosecution case. Learned

¶9

counsel also challenges the validity of the charge framed by the trial court, submitting that the same suffers from legal infirmity and has been framed in a mechanical manner. It is further argued that the allegations made in the FIR are omnibus, general, and vague in nature.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that the applicant, by administering an intoxicant substance to the victim, committed rape upon her. It is further submitted that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., has specifically and unequivocally alleged that the applicant was involved in the commission of rape, and her statement lends substantial support to the prosecution's case.

¶11

After hearing learned counsel for the applicant and having perused the material available on record, it prima facie observed that the allegations levelled against the applicant are serious in nature nature. The victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. carries substantial evidentiary value at the stage of cognizance and cannot be brushed aside. The Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335] has laid down that where the FIR discloses a cognizable offence, the criminal proceedings should not be quashed unless it appears that the proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide or are maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive.

¶12

In the present case, the victim has not only named the accused but has also supported the prosecution case through her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., which reflects consistency with the FIR. At this stage, the submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants relate to factual disputes which can only be

¶13

appropriately adjudicated upon by the trial court on the basis of evidence. The powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be exercised sparingly and with caution, and cannot be invoked to stifle a legitimate prosecution particularly in cases involving heinous offences and marginalized communities.

¶14

Upon careful perusal of the record, including the FIR, the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., medical report, and other relevant materials, this Court finds no ground to hold that the criminal proceedings are manifestly attended with mala fide or that the impugned order suffers from any illegality or perversity warranting interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶15

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 23.5.2025 A. Tripathi

¶17

Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶18

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anshul Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Anshul Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases