IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT rd ON THE 23 OF APRIL, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 39458 of 2023 BETWEEN:-

SMT. SUDAMA RAJPUT W/O SHRI HARGOVIND RAJPUT, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE, BUDDHVIHAR COLONY SOURA ROAD P.S ORCCHHA ROAD CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR NAVERIYA - ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONER)

AND

1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH P.S MAHILA THANA DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH).

2. VICTIM X D/O NOT MENTION NOT MENTION (MADHYA PRADESH).

.....RESPONDENT (SHRI NARENDRA CHOURASIA - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1/STATE AND MS. SANJANA SAHNI - ADVOCATE AND SHRI SAKET MALIK - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR registered at Crime No. 03/2023, at Police Station Mahila Thana, Chhatarpur. Offence against petitioner is registered under Sections 376(2)(n), 313 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3/8 of Madhya Pradesh Upcharya Grah tatha Rujopachar Sambandhi Sthapanayen Adhiniyam, 1973 (Amended Act of 2008) and Section 5(2) of Garbh Ka Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD KUMAR Chikitsiya Samapan Adhiniyam, 1971.

2. It is submitted by counsel appearing for petitioner that there is no mens rea o n part of petitioner. There is no material available on record regarding commission of offence against petitioner. In these circumstances, FIR be quashed and resultantly, Sessions Trial No. 105/2023 pending before 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur may also be quashed.

3. Government Advocate appearing for State as well as counsel appearing for prosecutrix supported the case against the petitioner.

4. Heard the counsel for the parties.

5. On going through case diary, it is found that oral statement of prosecutrix is recorded by police in which allegations were made. Said persons have stated that prosecutrix was pregnant when she visited the hospital. There may not be any medical evidence against the petitioner due to delay in disclosing the fact of abortion by prosecutrix. Nisha, who is relative of victim, stated about abortion. Statement of one Neetu Patel is also on record. She stated that Dr. Sudama Rajput was treating women for gynecological problems. Statement of Amit Sejwar is also available on record, who states that on 10.12.2022, at night 10:20 PM one guide has brought a girl. She stayed in hotel. She has also paid rent of room. Police has also recorded statement of accused, though same is not admissible in evidence. He has stated that prosecutrix got pregnant and with help of Ajay Tiwari, he took prosecutrix to Rajput Nursing Home, Saura Road and she was aborted. He used to talk with prosecutrix through whatsapp. Police has obtained call records and CDR, which show communications between Sanjay Tiwari and prosecutrix/victim A and Dr.

Sudama Rajput, which give some credence to prosecution story.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: VINOD KUMAR

6. In 164 statement, prosecutrix has also stated that against her consent, she was aborted by accused and doctors of Rajput Nursing Home. Prosecutrix consumed poison and tried to commit suicide. Her dying declaration was recorded on 14.02.2023 by Naib Tehsildar, wherein she stated about her rape and blackmailing by main accused. Police has also seized documents i.e. prescriptions and record of District Hospital, Chhatarpur and also of Rajput Nursing Home. Dr. Deepak Ahirwar also stated that he had examined prosecutrix on 12.03.2022 and she was found to be pregnant.

7. In view of aforesaid circumstances, at this stage, it will be too early to quash proceedings against petitioner on basis of no evidence. Some evidence is available against petitioner in case diary, which shows that prosecutrix was found naked and pregnant. Accused Sanjay Tiwari was talking to the doctor, who committed abortion and pres