The court established that allegations in an FIR, if taken at face value, can substantiate the commission of a cognizable offence, thus inhibiting quashing unless clearly abusive or lacking merit.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of F.I.R. No. 19 of 2020, dated 25.03.2020, registered at Police Station Renukaji, District Sirmour, H.P., for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of INDIAN PENAL CODE ( IPC ) and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO) and the consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR (the parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the victim (name being withheld to protect her identity) made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Shimla, asserting that the accused, Prakash, used to tease her and talk indecently with her. He used to follow her whenever she went to graze the goats. She was present in the Ghasni on 02.01.2020 at 3-4 p.m. when the accused came to the Ghasni and raped her. She shouted for help, but there was no one to help her. The accused threatened to kill her in case she revealed the incident to any person. She got frightened and could not reveal the incident to any person. She stopped menstruating, and her parents became suspicious. She revealed the incident to her parents. The police sent the FIR to Police Station Renukaji, where the incident had taken place. An FIR No.19 of 2020 was registered at the Police Station Renukaji. The police conducted the investigation and filed a charge sheet.

3. Being aggrieved by the registration of the F.I.R. and filing of the charge-sheet, the petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing of the F.I.R. and consequential proceedings arising out of it. It has been asserted that the victim was taken to the hospital for her medical check-up. No pregnancy was detected. The victim’s father went to the Police Station Renukaji on 03.04.2020 and stated that the victim had aborted the fetus. She was taken to the hospital and was medically examined. The Medical Officer opined that the victim never got pregnant and no abortion had taken place. This shows that the petitioner was falsely implicated. There is no possibility of succeeding in the case. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the FIR be quashed.

4. The petition is opposed by filing a reply making a preliminary submission regarding the lack of cause of action. The contents of the petition were denied on merits. It was asserted that the matter was transferred to Police Station Renukaji for investigation. The police conducted the investigation and found sufficient reasons to file a charge sheet before the learned Trial Court. It was admitted that the pregnancy test was found negative in Shimla and the Government Hospital, Dadahu. However, this does not mean that the victim was not sexually abused. The Medical Officer issued a report stating that the possibility of sexual assault could not be ruled out. The matter is pending before the learned Trial Court, where the accused will have an adequate opportunity to defend himself. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be dismissed.

5. I have heard Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Sparsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Jitender K. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent No.1/State, and Mr. Atul G. God, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

6. Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is innocent and was falsel