The court upheld the sufficiency of evidence for prosecution under IPC sections related to sexual offenses, dismissing the petition to quash the FIR.

Order :

1. By filing this petition, petitioner has prayed to quash the F.I.R. No.0192/2014 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Jhunjhunu and the Chargesheet bearing No.222/2015, so also the cognizance order dated 23.04.2015 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhunjhunu in Criminal Case No.199/2015, whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 342, 323, 366, 376 of I.P.C.

2. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner.

3. Since this petition was filed on 11.01.2016 and the same is pending for last more than nine years and, therefore, the Court is deciding the same on merits.

4. Brief facts of the case are that on 02.05.2014, a written report was submitted by respondent No.2, alleging that on 28.03.2014, when she was trying to contact her uncle to talk with her mother, she was contacted with a wrong phone number, who said that his name is Dinesh Swami and he is resident of Guda, and thereafter, he started regularly making call to the informant on the pretext of elections to seek vote in favour of Rajkumar Sharma. Thereafter, on 28.03.2014, when she went to Jhunjhunu for consultation with a Dentist, the accused made a call to her and after knowing that she is in Khetan Hospital, Jhunjhunu, he came there and took her in the vehicle to unknown place and committed rape upon her.

5. On the said report, the F.I.R. No.192/2014 was registered at Police Station Kotwali, Jhunjhunu for offences under Sections 323 & 376 of I.P.C.

6. After completion of the investigation, police submitted the Chargesheet No. 222/2015 under Section 299 Cr.P.C. for offences punishable under Sections 342, 323, 366, 376 of I.P.C. against the petitioner. The Chief Judicial Magistrate taking into consideration the conclusion report by the police and the evidence collected during investigation, took cognizance for the offences under Sections 343, 323, 366 & 376 of I.P.C.

7. After going through the evidence collected during investigation and so also the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., this Court finds that there is sufficient evidence available on record, so as to prosecute the accused/petitioner.

8. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence collected during investigation, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the matter.

9. Accordingly, the present Criminal Misc. Petition is dismissed.

Stay application stands disposed of.