FIR quashed against vehicle driver in rape case as no prima facie offence disclosed against him beyond following co-accused directions, applying quashing guidelines under inherent powers.

Judgment :

Virender Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the B.N.S.S.) for quashing FIR No. 249/2024, dated 7.11.2024, registered under Sections 64 and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS’), with Police Station, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (FIR in questio).

2. According to the petitioner, the said FIR has falsely been registered against him, as he has nothing to do with the offence, for which, he has been named and arrested, as accused.

3. According to the petitioner, he owns a Brezza car, bearing registration No. JK08M-9312. On 5.11.2024, petitioner had informed Dinesh Kumar that he would be going to Pathankot, for servicing of the car, upon which, Dinesh Kumar requested him to take him also, on the pretext that he wish to meet the prosecutrix at Gangath.

4. As per the case of the petitioner, he was not familiar with the prosecutrix, but accused Dinesh was in touch with her, through mobile and social media platform. Both of them were stated to be in relationship, and going to get married soon.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that he and Dinesh had gone to Pathankot for servicing of the car and Dinesh Kumar apprised him that the prosecutrix would meet him after her computer classes. Accused Dinesh Kumar and the prosecutrix planned to meet near Bheda Ground around 1:30 p.m. Since, the petitioner was not familiar with the location, as such, on the direction of accused Dinesh Kumar, and on the basis of Google map, he reached at the spot, where prosecutrix came and thereafter, both of them had travelled some distance by car. Thereafter, accused Dinesh Kumar requested the petitioner to stop the car and accused Dinesh Kumar and the prosecutrix alighted down from the car, on the pretext that they wish to walk for some time, as they want to discuss their future plans.

6. It is the further case of the petitioner that after some time, the accused and the prosecutrix came back and the prosecutrix requested the petitioner to drop her near her house. After dropping the prosecutrix, accused Dinesh Kumar came back, and on their way back home, they met with an accident. Consequently, petitioner left the car at Jammu Motor Garage in Kathua for repairs. Later on, the police party arrested him on 24.12.2024. It is only then he came to know about the registration of the FIR in question, against him.

7. The petitioner has pleaded that he has no role to play in the said crime, as he had only driven the vehicle and has no connection whatsoever with the crime in question.

8. After conclusion of the investigation, the Police has filed the charge sheet, which is pending in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nurpur, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’).

9. On the basis of above factual position, the petitioner has prayed that the FIR in question, registered against him, is nothing, but abuse of process of law, as he has no role to play in the crime.

10. Highlighting the above factual position, a prayer has been made to quash the FIR in question, as well as, the proceedings resultant thereto, pending in the learned trial Court.

11. When, put to notice, the Police filed the status report/reply, disclosing therein, that on 7.11.2024, a complaint was received in Police Station, Nurpur, District Ka