High Court dismissed in limine a writ petition challenging an FIR for offences under Sections 376, 506 IPC and Scheduled Castes and Tribes Act. Court held contentions were matters for trial and not grounds for quashment.
Writ petition dismissed in limine without notice to the other side.
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.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Petition (Cr.) No.21 of 2021
Ramanand Nishad, S/o Shri Bhuvneshwar Nishad, Aged 31 years, R/o Village Pasoud, P.S. Fingeshwar, Tehsil Rajim, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through its Secretary, Department of Home, Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur
2. The Superintendent of Police, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. The Incharge Officer, Police Station Amanaka, District Raipur (C.G.)
4. Smt. Ishwari Dhruw, W/o Shri Chaman Lal Dhruw, Aged 26 years, R/o Village Madwadih, Police Station Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
---- Respondents
For Petitioner: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 to 3 / State: - Mr. Sunil Otwani, Additional Advocate General, on advance copy.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal
Order On Board
19/01/2021
1. Heard on admission and application for grant of interim relief.
2. The petitioner seeks to challenge the FIR registered against him for offence under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
3. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that the alleged offence has been
2
committed on 11-6-2020 and FIR has been made on 18-6-2020, there is huge delay in lodging the FIR and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the offence. He would further submit that even after marriage of respondent No.4, the petitioner has given money to respondent No.4 on 18-5-2020 which shows that it is a clear case of consent, therefore, no case is made out against the petitioner for offence under Section 376 of the IPC. He would rely upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India and others 1 to support his contention.
4. All the submissions raised by the petitioner viz., there is delay in making FIR, the petitioner has been falsely implicated as there is long relationship between the petitioner & respondent No.4, it is a case of consent and even after the respondent No.4 victim is married, some payment has been made to her by the petitioner which goes to show that there is consent between the petitioner & respondent No.4, are matters / grounds to be taken during trial, as such, no case for quashment of FIR at this stage is made out in light of the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others 2. As such, the writ petition deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed in limine, without notice to the other side. No order as to cost(s).
Sd/(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge
Soma
1 (2020) 4 SCC 727
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for quashing the FIR deserves to be allowed at this stage given the delay and allegations of consent.
Whether submissions regarding delay and the relationship between parties are matters to be taken during trial or grounds for quashment.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India and othersReferred¶21
Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India and others 1
State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and othersReferred¶22
State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others 2
Ramanand Nishad, S/o Shri Bhuvneshwar Nishad
State of Chhattisgarh, Through its Secretary, Department of Home
The Superintendent of Police, District Raipur
The Incharge Officer, Police Station Amanaka
Smt. Ishwari Dhruw, W/o Shri Chaman Lal Dhruw
Sanjay K. Agrawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
