IMPORTANT POINT
The power of quashing should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances when a prima facie case is not made out against the accused. The court also highlighted the principles that govern the law on quashing of a First Information Report under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT

Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. (Oral) - The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C.') has been filed on behalf of petitioner seeking quashing of FIR bearing no. 146/2022, registered at Police Station Delhi Cantt, New Delhi for the offences punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC') and Section 6 of POCSO Act and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. Briefly stated, facts of the present case are that the present FIR was registered at the instance of the prosecutrix wherein she had alleged that her maternal uncle i.e., the present petitioner had tried to commit rape upon her near the Dhaula Kuan Bus Stand, where they were spotted by two women who made a PCR Call. It is further alleged that one of the said women had also tried to hold the petitioner back but he had absconded from the place of incident. Thereafter, MLC of the prosecutrix had been conducted and her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. had been recorded on 11.05.2022. During further course of the investigation, it had been revealed that the prosecutrix/victim is was 8 years old on the date of incident. Thereafter, the present petitioner had been arrested in the present FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case whereas he has nothing to do with the alleged offence. It is argued that on 04.03.2023, during the examination of the victim before the learned Trial Court, the victim/prosecutrix has not supported the case of the prosecution as there are material discrepancies in the statements of the prosecutrix and the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted that the petitioner was released on bail vide order dated 17.08.2023 by this Court wherein it has been specifically stated that the case of the prosecution has not been supported by the prosecutrix. It is also stated that the proceedings with the trial would result in abuse of process of court, and would not serve the ends of justice and therefore, it is prayed that the present FIR be quashed.

4. Per contra, learned APP for the State opposes the present petition and argues that there are serious allegations against the petitioner, in view of which the FIR in question should not be quashed.

5. This Court has heard arguments addressed by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State and has perused the material on record.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid the guidelines for quashing the FIR in State of Haryana and Ors. v. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors., 1992 SCC (Cri) 426, which reads as under:

"102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extra-ordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers Under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

1. Where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima-facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

2. Where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers Under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.