ORDER essential ingredients of Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the Act are not attracted.

6. It is submitted that the petitioner was never involved at any stage in the alleged relationship between the prosecutrix and the co-accused. If the proceedings are permitted to continue, the same would result in gross miscarriage of justice and cause irreparable harm to the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that this Court may be pleased to allow the present petition and quash the impugned FIR and all consequential criminal proceedings insofar as they relate to the present petitioner, in the interest of justice.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposes the petition and submits that a bare reading of the FIR and the material collected during investigation prima facie discloses the commission of cognizable offences and the involvement of the present petitioner, Ravindra Gurjar. At the stage of consideration of a petition for quashing, this Court is required to see only whether the allegations, if taken at face value, disclose the commission of any offence and not to undertake a meticulous examination of evidenc