The main legal point established is that the jurisdiction for quashing an FIR may be exercised only in specific circumstances as laid down in relevant case laws.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 42 of 2023, under Section 376 IPC, Police Station Rajpur, District Dehradun

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the petitioner established physical relations with the informant for two years preceding filing of the FIR under the assurance that he would marry her. Thereafter, the petitioner continued establishing relations on multiple occasions. But, now he is not responding.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a bare perusal of FIR does not reveal any offence as such. It is a case fit for quashing of the FIR. He would submit that the principle of law, as laid down in the case of State of Haryana and Others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, also mandates quashing of this FIR because even if the contents of the FIR are accepted to be true, no offence is made out. In addition to it, it is argued that the principles of law, as laid down in the case of Promod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and another, (2019) 9 SCC 608, are also applicable in this case. In the instant case, consent has not been obtained under any misconception of fact. Therefore, FIR deserves to be quashed

5. It is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. If an FIR discloses commission of offence, generally no interference is warranted. It is the domain of the Investigating Officer to ascertain the truthfulness or credibility of the FIR.

6. In the State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, illustratively gave the circumstances, under which this jurisdiction may be exercised and in para 102 observed as hereunder:-

“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 extraordinary 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 FIR 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.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concer