IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. M. P. 1234 of 2002
Md. Mukho @ Md. Raft Ahmad ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Rijman Khatoon ... Opposite Parties
...
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD
...
For the Petitioner : - M/s S. S. Choudhary, Advocate.
For the State : - Mr. S. N. Rajgaria, APP.
For the Complainant : None.
...
04/09.09.2011
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned
counsel appearing for the State.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
complainant lodged a case putting allegation that on giving false
promise to marry her the petitioner went on having sex with her as a
result of which she became pregnant, but the petitioner refused to
marry her. On that basis an F.I.R. was lodged under Section 376 of
the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that in course of investigation the complainant made a
statement under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C. stating therein that she
was not in sound state of mind at the time of instituting the case and
due to mental disturbance the case has been instituted on allegation,
which are not correct and as a matter of fact, she on account of
having sex with her husband did carry pregnancy. Thus, these
statements falsify the entire allegations made by the complaintant in
the F.I.R. Inspite of that cognizance of the offence under Section 376
of the Indian Penal Code was taken and therefore, the petitioner has
challenged the order taking cognizance as the statement made under
Section 164 of the Cr. P. C. clearly reveals that the petitioner is
innocent and has committed no offence.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of
the record, I find that on allegations being made against the
petitioner a case was registered under Section 376 of the Indian
Penal Code. The complainant subsequently has made statement
under Section 164 of the Cr. P. C., whereby she has denied those
allegations, which have been put in the F.I.R. but that cannot be a
ground for quashing of the F.I.R. or of the order taking cognizance
rather that matter is to be looked into during the trial.
Accordingly, I do not find any merit. Hence, it is disposed of
with a direction to the court concerned to proceed with the trial and
to conclude it as expeditiously as possible.
(R.R.Prasad, J.)
Kamlesh/