Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 362 (UTT)

MEHFOOJ @ RAHIL @ TIPU v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2019-05-30

RAVINDRA MAITHANI

body2019
JUDGMENT Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the F.I.R. No.0204 of 2019, under Sections 354 (ka), 341, 506 of IPC and Section 7/8 of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act'), Police Station Patel Nagar, District Dehradun. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 3. According to the F.I.R., daughter of the first informant is aged about 17 years, a minor. The petitioner has been harassing her for about a month prior to lodging of the F.I.R. On 27.03.2019, when the prosecutrix had gone to write her examination, the petitioner stopped her on the way and started molesting her. Somehow, she escaped from there and narrated the incident to the first informant and his wife. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that petitioner and the prosecutrix are in love; they have record of video chats; the offence is not made out because the intent is not sexual as mentioned under Section 7 of the Act; learned counsel for the petitioner further argues that at least directions may be issued to the investigating officer that arrest should not be routine and mechanical without following the law as laid down in this behalf by the Hon'ble Supreme Court or the statutory provisions. 5. The F.I.R discloses commission of cognizable offence. In so far as question of sexual intent is concerned, Section 29 of the Act makes provisions regarding presumption of the intent. Prosecutrix is admittedly a minor. What is the truthfulness of the F.I.R. is a matter for investigation or at trial, as the case may be. Therefore, this Court is of the view that no interference is warranted in this case and the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 6. The writ petition is dismissed. However, the Investigating Officer if decides to arrest the petitioner shall follow the law as laid down by the Courts, in this regard as well as the legal provisions and will remind himself that liberty is a precious right which should not be curtailed in a routine manner.