VIRENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) On 16.02018, complainant lodged an F.I.R. against the petitioner, alleging therein, that she knew the petitioner since 2016, as he used to invariably visit to the house of the complainant. In the F.I.R. it is stated that the applicant raped her by enticing and intoxicating something in her food. Thereafter the petitioner issued threats to her of vulgar C.D. of the incident and demanded money from the complainant. In the F.I.R. it is also stated that on the basis of the aforesaid C.D., petitioner raped the applicant many a times.

(3.) It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant crime. He submitted that, in fact, the sister of respondent no. 4, namely, Smt. Soniya and brother-in-law of respondent no. 4 committed maarpeet with the mother of the petitioner, for which complaint was made to the S.S.P. Haridwar and due to this reason petitioner has been implicated in the present case falsely. He further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner of rape, money transaction and videography made in the F.I.R. are incorrect.