JUDGMENT :

Sumeet Goel, J.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. of 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as 'Cr.P.C., 1973') by the petitioner-Mahender Singh for quashing of FIR No.0303 dated 08.10.2021 registered under Sections 323, 354-A, 354-B and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 376 and 511 of IPC were added later on) at Police Station Kheripul, District Faridabad, Haryana; with a further prayer for quashing of the challan dated 29.10.2021 along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

2. The factual matrix of the case, as relevant for consideration of the issue(s) in hand, is as follows:

(i) An FIR was got registered by the complainant-respondent No.2 bearing FIR No.0303 dated 08.10.2021 registered under Sections 323, 354-A, 354-B and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 376 and 511 of IPC (added later on) at Police Station Kheripul, District Faridabad, Haryana. The said FIR, as spelt out in the present petition, reads as follows:

(ii) The challan (report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. of 1973) was filed by the Police in which Sections 376 and 511 of IPC were added.

(iii) The petitioner had earlier preferred a quashing petition before this Court vide CRM-M-60640-2023 which came to be decided on 05.02.2024. The said order reads as under:

'Faced with the situation that the challan (report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C.) has not been impugned in the present petition, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to file afresh with complete particulars.

Permission is granted. The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.'

(iv) Pursuant to above-said challan having been filed on 29.10.2021, the charges were framed against the petitioner on 31.01.2022.

(v). Thereafter, prosecution evidence was led wherein testimony of the complainant/victim was recorded on 17.10.2023 (copy whereof has been appended with the present petition as Annexure P-11).

(vi). It is in this factual backdrop that the instant petition has been preferred seeking quashing of the FIR in question.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the impugned FIR. According to learned counsel, there is improvement in the stand of the material prosecution witnesses. Moreover, there is no medical evidence on record to support the case of the prosecution. It has been further argued that the statement of the victim which has been recorded as PW-1 shows multiple instances of improvement and hence her testimony cannot be made basis for conviction of the present petitioner. Thus, quashing of the FIR in question is sought for.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has submitted that after completion of investigation, charges have been framed against the petitioner and the substantial evidence has already been led including the testimony of the complainant-victim. She has referred to para 8 of the status report filed by way of affidavit of Rajeev Kumar, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central, Faridabad. The same reads as under:

'8. That after completion of the investigation, challan/final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner/accused was prepared on 29.10.2021 (under Section 323, 354A, 354B, 376, 511, 506 of IPC) and submitted for trial on 07.01.2022. Charge against the petitioner/accused has been framed under Section 323, 354, 354A, 354B, 376/511 & 506 of IPC on 31.01.2022. There are total 13 prosecution witnesses in the present case and out of which 7 PWs including the prosecutrix have been examined so far and remaining 6 witnesses are yet to be examined. Now the present case is pending in the court of Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad on 16.05.2024 for prosecution evidence.'

Learned State counsel has submitted that the remaining 06 prosecution witnesses, who are official witnesses, have been summoned before the trial Court for 06.06.2024 for recording of their testimonies as pro