Allahabad High Court High Court

Alok Yadav vs State Of U.P.,Thru. Prin. … on 6 July, 2010

Allahabad High Court
Alok Yadav vs State Of U.P.,Thru. Prin. … on 6 July, 2010
Court No. - 20

Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 6200 of 2010

Petitioner :- Alok Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P.,Thru. Prin. Secy.,Home & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Basant Lal,Dilip Kumar
Respondent Counsel :- G.A.

Hon'ble Raj Mani Chauhan,J.

Hon’ble Virendra Kumar Dixit,J.

Learned A.G.A. files counter affidavit and learned counsel for the petitioner
files supplementary affidavit, which are taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A and perused the FIR.
This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by
the petitioner for quashing the impugned FIR dated 21.05.2010 registered in
case crime 748 of 2010, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. at Police Station
Neemgaon, District Kheri and also for direction to the opposite parties not to
arrest the petitioner in pursuance to the said impugned FIR.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the prosecutrix
and accused petitioner being major entered into marriage on their own sweet
will. This fact is supported by the marriage certificate filed by the petitioner.
Therefore, no offence under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. is made out against
the accused. He, therefore needs protection.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the petition and argued that the prosecutrix in her
statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate has levelled
the charges against the accused-petitioner that he had committed rape on her,
therefore, offence under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. is made out against him.
Keeping in view the nature of offence, accused-petitioner does not deserve
any protection.

Considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.G.A.

The prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has
levelled specific charge against the petitioner that he had committed rape on
her. Keeping in view the nature of offence, we do not find any ground to
quash the FIR. The petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

Order Date :- 6.7.2010
Renu