ORDER : 1. The petitioner seeks quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) bearing Crime No. 616/2017 registered at Police Station, Bemetara, District Bemetara, against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 2. As per the prosecution the case, on 16.10.2017, the complainant-respondent No. 2 has lodged report before the Police Station, Bemetara, alleging that for the last one year, the petitioner has been teasing her daughter who was studying in Class IX. The further case of the complainant is that her daughter always complained about the petitioner’s behavior and also his action to towards her. It is further alleged in the report, that the petitioner abused her daughter with filthy language and also committed sexual assault on her. 3. After having come to know about the aforesaid FIR, the mother of the petitioner/accused has given the representation before the Collector as well different authorities for fair investigations. In the representations, the mother of the petitioner has specifically stated that the petitioner is studying at Bilaspur in I.T.I course and he was not residing at Bemetara for last one year, therefore there is no question to tease the respondent No. 2’s daughter at that point of time. As a matter of fact, due to plucking of flowers there was some dispute between the mother of the petitioner and the respondent No. 2. and in order to take revenge, the respondent No. 2 has lodged a false complaint. In the representations, it was specifically contended that before registering the offence, the police authority has not sent the matter before Child Welfare Committee for proper enquiry as the petitioner is also a juvenile and in such circumstances the enquiry by the said committee is required as per law. 4. Ms. Sharmila Singhai, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent No. 2 is habitual of lodging report of sexual harassment against the different persons. Earlier also, she has lodged report against one Neelkanth Chandrakar and Ayodhya Chandrakar under section 376 of IP.C and as such, a report was made by the senior citizens of that locality for fair enquiry before the Superintend of Police. Earlier also, she has lodged report against one Neelkanth Chandrakar and Ayodhya Chandrakar under section 376 of IP.C and as such, a report was made by the senior citizens of that locality for fair enquiry before the Superintend of Police. Similarly several citizens of that locality have also given an application before the Superintendent of Police for fair investigation regarding false implication of the petitioner and sworn the affidavits in support of the same. 5. Ms. Singhai further submits that the prosecution, while registering the case, has completely overlooked the fact that the petitioner is residing at Bilaspur for last one year, therefore, it is completely false allegation that for the last one hear, he has been harassing the victim. According to the complainant herself no specific allegation is made in the FIR against the petitioner nor there is mention of any one single instance mentioning the date place and time with regard to the sexual assault or use of abusive language. Only a general allegation is made that the petitioner has been harassing the daughter of respondent No. 2 for the last one year. The petitioner is also a minor boy and his entire career would be jeopardized if the false FIR registered against him, is not quashed. The present case is nothing but an abuse of process of law. 6. Mr. Gurudev I Sharan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondent No. 1 submits that today, he is not having the file and as such, is not in a position to assist the Court. However, he expresses his sincere regrets for the same. 7. Mr. R.K.Pali, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 pleads no instructions. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents appended thereto. 9. This case was listed for the first time on 10.11.2017, and this Court, while issuing notices to the respondents, observed as under: “Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the petitioner who is admittedly a juvenile has been inculpated in the offence u/s 354 of IPC read with section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and the punishment in both the counts if at all is taken into consideration, it cannot be within the heinous offence as per sub-section (33) of section (2) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. It is further contended that in such event Rule 8 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model Rules 2016 do not allow the registration of the FIR directly by the Police at a police station and as laid down the procedure to be followed. It is contended that in this case without following such rules and the Act, despite the fact that the petitioner is juvenile, the FIR has been registered which is against the statute , therefore, the FIR cannot be acted upon. Perused the FIR. It appears that the petitioner is a juvenile. Taking into such fact and on perusal of the documents, the issue needs consideration. Issue notice to the respondents as per Rules. In the meanwhile, as an interim measure, it is directed that no further proceedings shall be drawn against the petitioner pursuant to the FIR lodged vide Crime No.616/2017 till the next date of hearing. Cc as per Rule.” 10. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 03.01.2018, 06.02.2018, 13.01.2020 and 19.02.2020 but no return has been filed on behalf of the respondent No. 2. Even the return of the State/respondent No. 1 was filed on 05.11.2019 i.e. almost after 1 year and 10 months and that too, without adverting to the pleadings which was taken note of in the order dated 10.11.2017. 11. The aforesaid conduct of the State goes to show that in essence, the State has nothing to explain except that the petitioner was directed to appear before the Station House Officer, Bemetara and that the petitioner has rushed to this Court directly. In the return, it has been further stated by the State the matter is under investigation and there is no illegality in registering the FIR and that a cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner. The return is completely silent on the aspect of following the process as laid down in Rule 8 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model Rules, 2016 which does not allow the police to register FIR directly. Reliance has been placed by the State on the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 . 12. Reliance has been placed by the State on the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 . 12. In the FIR (Annexure (P/1), only a bald and omnibus allegation has been made by the respondent No. 2 that her daughter was being harassed by the petitioner for the last one year. She has not even cared to mention any specific instance with date, time and place as to when and where any incident of outraging her modesty or with regard to any sexual assault. 13. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to the FIR was stayed by this Court. Even today, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 pleads no instructions and submits that he had tried to contact his client but there was no response. It appears that the respondent No. 2 is also not serious with regard to her complaint. 14. Further, the petitioner has also filed affidavits of various residents of the locality with regard to the conduct of the respondent No. 2 who has been indulged in lodging criminal complaints against various people. In one instance, she had made a complaint on 23.03.2016 to the Superintendent of Police Bemetara with regard to commission of rape by one Ayodhya Chandrakar. Later, she herself has withdrawn that complaint on 16.04.2016 stating that she had a relationship outside the marriage with the accused and that they have settled their dispute. Further, the complainant had alleged that the petitioner has been harassing her daughter for the last one year and as per the version of the petitioner, he has been studying at I.T.I Bilaspur during that time. Hence, the allegation of the respondent No. 2 gets falsified. Further, it is very surprising as to how a school going girl, aged about 14 years studying in Class IX could have been harassed for almost a year and still she did not make any complain to her parents. 15. Rule 8 and 9 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Model Rules, 2016 reads as under: “8. Pre-Production action of Police and other Agencies.-(1) No First Information Report shall be registered except where a heinous offence is alleged to have been committed by the child, or when such offence is alleged to have been committed jointly with adults. Pre-Production action of Police and other Agencies.-(1) No First Information Report shall be registered except where a heinous offence is alleged to have been committed by the child, or when such offence is alleged to have been committed jointly with adults. In all other matters, the Special Juvenile Police Unit or the Child Welfare Police Officer shall record the information regarding the offence alleged to have been committed by the child in the general daily diary followed by a social background report of the child in Form 1 and circumstances under which the child was apprehended, wherever applicable, and forward it to the Board before the first hearing: Provided that the power to apprehend shall only be exercised with regard to heinous offences, unless it is in the best interest of the child. For all other cases involving petty and serious offences and cases where apprehending the child is not necessary in the interest of the child, the police or Special Juvenile Police Unit or Child Welfare Police Officer shall forward the information regarding the nature of offence alleged to be committed by the child along with his social background report in Form 1 to the Board and intimate the parents or guardian of the child as to when the child is to be produced for hearing before the Board. (2) When a child alleged to be in conflict with law is apprehended by the police, the police officer concerned shall place the child under the charge of the Special Juvenile Police Unit or the Child Welfare Police Officer, who shall immediately inform: (i) the parents or guardian of the child that the child has been apprehended along with the address of the Board where the child will be produced and the date and time when the parents or guardian need to be present before the Board; (ii) the Probation Officer concerned, that the child has been apprehended so as to enable him to obtain information regarding social background of the child and other material circumstances likely to be of assistance to the Board for conducting the inquiry; and (iii) a Child Welfare Officer or a Case Worker, to accompany the Special Juvenile Police Unit or Child Welfare Police Officer while producing the child before the Board within twenty- four hours of his apprehension. (3) The police officer apprehending a child alleged to be in conflict with law shall: (i) not send the child to a police lock-up and not delay the child being transferred to the Child Welfare Police Officer from the nearest police station. The police officer may under sub-section (2) of section 12 of the Act send the person apprehended to an observation home only for such period till he is produced before the Board i.e. within twenty-four hours of his being apprehended and appropriate orders are obtained as per rule 9 of these rules; (ii) not hand-cuff, chain or otherwise fetter a child and shall not use any coercion or force on the child; (iii) inform the child promptly and directly of the charges levelled against him through his parent or guardian and if a First Information Report is registered, copy of the same shall be made available to the child or copy of the police report shall be given to the parent or guardian; (iv) provide appropriate medical assistance, assistance of interpreter or a special educator, or any other assistance which the child may require, as the case may be; (v) not compel the child to confess his guilt and he shall be interviewed only at the Special Juvenile Police Unit or at a child-friendly premises or at a child friendly corner in the police station, which does not give the feel of a police station or of being under custodial interrogation. The parent or guardian, may be present during the interview of the child by the police; (vi) not ask the child to sign any statement; and (vii) inform the District Legal Services Authority for providing free legal aid to the child. (4) The Child Welfare Police Officer shall be in plain clothes and not in uniform. (5) The Child Welfare Police Officer shall record the social background of the child and circumstances of apprehending in every case of alleged involvement of the child in an offence in Form 1 which shall be forwarded to the Board forthwith. For gathering the best available information, it shall be necessary upon the Special Juvenile Police Unit or the Child Welfare Police Officer to contact the parent or guardian of the child. For gathering the best available information, it shall be necessary upon the Special Juvenile Police Unit or the Child Welfare Police Officer to contact the parent or guardian of the child. (6) A list of all designated Child Welfare Police Officers, Child Welfare Officers, Probation Officers, Para Legal Volunteers, District Legal Services Authorities and registered voluntary and non-governmental organisations in a district, Principal Magistrate and members of the Board, members of Special Juvenile Police Unit and Childline Services with contact details shall be prominently displayed in every police station. (7) When the child is released in a case where apprehending of the child is not warranted, the parents or guardians or a fit person in whose custody the child alleged to be in conflict with law is placed in the best interest of the child, shall furnish an undertaking on a non-judicial paper in Form 2 to ensure their presence on the dates during inquiry or proceedings before the Board. (8) The State Government shall maintain a panel of voluntary or non-governmental organisations or persons who are in a position to provide the services of probation, counselling, case work and also associate with the Police or Special Juvenile Police Unit or the Child Welfare Police Officer, and have the requisite expertise to assist in physical production of the child before the Board within twenty-four hours and during pendency of the proceedings and the panel of such voluntary or non-governmental organisations or persons shall be forwarded to the Board. (9) The State Government shall provide funds to the police or Special Juvenile Police Unit or the Child Welfare Police Officer or Case Worker or person for the safety and protection of children and provision of food and basic amenities including travel cost and emergency medical care to the child apprehended or kept under their charge during the period such children are with them. 9. Production of the child alleged to be in conflict with law before the Board.-(1) When the child alleged to be in conflict with law is apprehended, he shall be produced before the Board within twenty-four hours of his being apprehended, along with a report explaining the reasons for the child being apprehended by the police. 9. Production of the child alleged to be in conflict with law before the Board.-(1) When the child alleged to be in conflict with law is apprehended, he shall be produced before the Board within twenty-four hours of his being apprehended, along with a report explaining the reasons for the child being apprehended by the police. (2) On production of the child before the Board, the Board may pass orders as deemed necessary, including sending the child to an observation home or a place of safety or a fit facility or a fit person. (3) Where the child produced before the Board is covered under section 83 of the Act, including a child who has surrendered, the Board may, after due inquiry and being satisfied of the circumstances of the child, transfer the child to the Committee as a child in need of care and protection for necessary action, and or pass appropriate directions for rehabilitation, including orders for safe custody and protection of the child and transfer to a fit facility recognised for the purpose which shall have the capacity to provide appropriate protection, and consider transferring the child out of the district or out of the State to another State for the protection and safety of the child. (4) Where the child alleged to be in conflict with law has not been apprehended and the information in this regard is forwarded by the police or Special Juvenile Police Unit or Child Welfare Police Officer to the Board, the Board shall require the child to appear before it at the earliest so that measures for rehabilitation, where necessary, can be initiated, though the final report may be filed subsequently. (5) In case the Board is not sitting, the child alleged to be in conflict with law shall be produced before a single member of the Board under sub-section (2) of section 7 of the Act. (6) In case the child alleged to be in conflict with law cannot be produced before the Board or even a single member of the Board due to child being apprehended during odd hours or distance, the child shall be kept by the Child Welfare Police Officer in the Observation Home in accordance with rule 69 D of these rules or in a fit facility and the child shall be produced before the Board thereafter, within twenty-four hours of apprehending the child. (7) When a child is produced before an individual member of the Board, and an order is obtained, such order shall be ratified by the Board in its next meeting” 16. From perusal of the above, it is evident that a complete mechanism has been provided in the Rules of 2016 as to how a juvenile in conflict with law has to be dealt with. Rule 8 clearly prescribes that no FIR shall be registered except where a heinous offence is alleged to have been committed by the child. The allegations made by the complainant also does not inspire confidence of this Court to accept it to be true, though the same is the subject matter of investigation by the police. The complainant herself is alleged to be in a habit of extorting money from various people after lodging false complaint. The State has not bothered to answer this aspect of the matter as to how the police has registered the FIR directly when a complete modality is provided under the Rules of 2016. There is not a single word with regard to steps that were taken by the Police before or after registering of the FIR as both the victim and the accused were minor at that point of time. The petitioner cannot be treated at par with an accused who is major. The reliance placed by the State in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra) is not relevant to the facts of the case as the victim and the accused both are juvenile. 17. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the FIR registered at Police Station, Bemetara being Crime No. 616/2017 be quashed. 18. It is ordered accordingly. 19. Consequently, this petition is allowed.