2025:UHC:5124 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Criminal No. 625 of 2025 19 June, 2025 Vishal Kaushal --Petitioner Versus State Of Uttarakhand and Ors. --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Anand Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr. Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned A.G.A. with Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent Nos.1 & 2. Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. The office has pointed out the defect in the present criminal writ petition as the photocopy of the First Information Report has been crossed. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed the typed copy of the FIR. Accordingly, the defect pointed out by the Office is ruled out. 2. By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has put to challenge the FIR No.0157 of 2025 dated 04.06.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and under Sections 351(3) and 64(1) of the B.N.S. Act, 2023, registered with Police Station Sitarganj, District Udham Singh Nagar, as well as for a direction to respondent Nos.1 and 2 not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to the aforesaid FIR. 1 2025:UHC:5124 3. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No.3, mother of victim lodged the FIR with the allegation that on 31.05.2025, while staying in the room of brother of respondent No.3-Rama Sah (who is uncle of victim), petitioner (driver of Rama Sah) brought her daughter (victim) from her son’s room to his house at 12:30 PM in his residence, and after reaching his residence, he locked her daughter in a room and beaten her and raped her forcibly till about 6 o’clock, and after raping her, threatened to make the video of the rape viral and to kill the entire family; petitioner’s father also threatened to kill her, if she informed any other person or the family members. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that no offences under the aforementioned Sections are made out against the petitioner, as there is compromise held between the petitioner and victim’s uncle on 02.06.2025 and the FIR was lodged on 04.06.2025, which reflects the old enmity between the parties. From bare perusal of compromise held between the parties, it is reflected that there is dispute between the petitioner and family members of respondent No.3 regarding money transaction. It is further contended by him that the medical of the victim conducted and neither there was any injury nor there was any symptoms of rape found to the body of the victim; the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant crime as this FIR is a tool to extort money from the petitioner. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel supported the story narrated in the FIR and submits that prima- facie, the offences are made out against the petitioner. 2 2025:UHC:5124 6. From perusal of the first information report, this Court is of the view that prima-facie, the commission of cognizable offences is made out against the petitioner. The offences alleged against the petitioner are very serious in nature, therefore, this Court doesn’t want to interfere with the impugned FIR. Moreover, prima-facie, the offences are made out. He deserves no protection from this Court. Accordingly, the present criminal writ petition is dismissed in-limine. 7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 19.06.2025 PN 3 PREETI NEGI Digitally signed by PREETI NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=63c75a8c4765581180a58d7478fadbe38331ba c55c78b5f9f0276c16432f6aab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=2BA53171893B3C3CB3CCCAE81FAE064 498483A83D84BDB0F9229D5BF08D959AC, cn=PREETI NEGI Date: 2025.06.20 10:25:02 +05'30'