NITESH VERMA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashment of FIR dated 03.03.2021 (Annexure P/1).

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that on 03.03.21 respondent No. 2, who is wife of petitioner, has lodged false and frivolous complaint in respect of incident which was allegedly taken place on 16.07.20. Based upon which, FIR under Sections 294, 323 and 506 of IPC is registered against petitioner. There is inordinate delay in lodging FIR. On the date of alleged incident, petitioner was not present at the place of incident or in city of Korba itself, but he was in Raipur. Furthermore, alleged incident is of 16.07.2020 and during that period, petitioner was taking medical treatment in Raipur. He also received messages on his mobile phone asking about his health. Petitioner cannot be harassed by undergoing entire trial of a false and baseless complaint. Complaint has been lodged by respondent No. 1/wife only to pressurize and harass the petitioner. Hence, FIR registered against him be quashed.

(3.) Learned State Counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and submits that there are specific allegations in FIR that petitioner has assaulted his wife i.e. complainant, in the house of her parents. In FIR name of independent eye-witnesses, who are stated to be neighbourers have also been mentioned. Hence, in view of independent eye-witness, as shown in FIR, plea of alibi could not be decided in writ petition. Grounds raised by petitioner in writ petition can be good defence for him, but the same cane be decided after trial where petitioner will get an opportunity of cross-examining the witnesses.