Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68512-DB Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7854 of 2025 Petitioner :- Monu Rathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey,G.A. Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is assailing the legality and validity of the FIR dated 02.10.2024 lodged in Case Crime No.327 of 2024, under Sections- 376, 506 I.P.C and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Madhuban Bapudham, District- Ghaziabad (Nagar Comissionerate). 3. There are allegations against the petitioner that he has committed offence of rape against the minor girl. Initially he has befriended her mother and after taking advantage of relation-ship with her mother, he has committed offence of rape against the daughter hence first information report has been lodged. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent no.4, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, informs that applicant has criminal history of 14 cases. 5. Learned AGA informs that he has instructions that applicant has criminal history of nine cases. 6. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the petitioner at this stage. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. 7. The prayer for quashing the FIR of the aforesaid case is refused. 8. However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the petitioner appears before the court below within 60 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 9. With the aforesaid directions, this petition is finally disposed of. 10. However, in case, the petitioner does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him. 11. It is made clear that the petitioner will not be granted any further time by this Court for appearing before the court below as directed above. Order Date :- 1.5.2025 SS Digitally signed by :- SURENDER SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad