HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Misc. Application No. 2017 of 2019

Dr. Rekha Gupta

…........ Applicant

Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and another

…..... Respondents

Present : Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Lalit Sharma,

Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Lalit Miglani, AGA for the State.

Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, Advocate for the respondent no. 2.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Challenge in the instant petition is made to the

order dated 09.09.2019 passed in Sessions Trial No. 57 of

2016, State v. Yasmeen & others, by the court of 2^nd

Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital. By the impugned

order, an application under Section 307 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Code”) filed by

respondent no. 2 has been allowed.

2.

The case has chequered history. Briefly stated,

it is as hereunder.

3.

On 30.05.2014, one Smt. Shama Parveen,

lodged an FIR under Section 376(2), 506 IPC and 5/6 of

the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

It was registered as FIR No. 118 of 2014, at P.S.

2

Sahaspur, District Dehradun (“the FIR No. 118 of 2014”).

According to it, her daughter aged 15 years then was

raped by accused Furkan. The victim was taken in a

hospital at Herbertpur, Dehradun, where Dr. Rekha gave

some medicine due to which the condition of the victim

deteriorated. One Kallu also threatened the informant to

life.

4.

The respondent no. 2, Smt. Yasmeen filed Writ

Petition (Criminal) No. 631 of 2014 (“the first petition”) for

quashing the FIR No. 118 of 2014 filed by Smt. Shama

Parveen. In the first petition, interim directions were

issued on 05.06.2014 with the direction that no coercive

steps should be taken against the respondent no. 2. It

may be noted here that the respondent no. 2 Smt.

Yasmeen had filed the first writ petition in the name of Dr.

Rekha Rani. The investigation continued in the FIR No.

118 of 2014 and, after investigation, the Investigating

Officer submitted a chargesheet.

5.

Thereafter,

another

petition

was

filed

by

respondent no. 2 Smt. Yasmeen impersonating herself as

Dr. Rekha Gupta, which was registered as C-482 No. 669

of 2015 (“the second petition”). The second petition was

dismissed on 05.06.2015. It appears that thereafter non-

bailable warrants were issued in the matter. Thereafter,

the petitioner moved C-482 Petition No. 1566 of 2015,

3

Rekha Gupta v. State (“the third petition”), before this

Court and it is then revealed that the first petition and

second petition, which were filed in the name of Dr. Rekha

Gupta were, in fact, filed by the respondent no. 2,

Yasmeen, impersonating as Dr. Rekha Gupta. During the

course of hearing of the third petition, the respondent no.

2 was present before the Court. She was questioned by

the Court and what she stated has been reproduced by

the Court in its order dated 04.01.2016, which is as

hereunder :-

“Ms. Yasmeen is present in person before this

Court duly identified by Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate.

Ms. Yasmeen has stated before me that she was

working with Dr. S.B. Gupta in his clinic as

Receptionist; she has joined the clinic of Dr. S.B. Gupta

in the year 2010; Dr. Rekha Gupta (petitioner present

in person) was not physically present in Vikas Nagar

and was away from Vikas Nagar, therefore, Dr. S.B.

Gupta has pressurized her to have physical relations

with him. Further stated that in fact Dr. S.B. Gupta has

forcefully made physical relations with her; fearing the

loss of job, she kept on facing sexual harassment made

by Dr. S.B. Gupta; Dr. S.B. Gupta has produced all the

documents of other two petitions before her to sign as

Dr. Rekha Rani, which she has signed under the

pressure of Dr. S.B. Gupta. She further stated that Dr.

S.B. Gupta has not only ruined her character but has

also ruined h