NARENDRA KUMAR KASHYAP Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

(2.) THE relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. registered at case crime no. 315 of 2012, under sections 363, 366, 368, 376 (g) IPC, PS Haldaur, district Bijnor.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a practicing lawyer and he was unlikely to take part in such a crime of gang rape. It is also submitted that the petitioner was not named in the FIR, but one Zakir and Bhure were named as having been instrumental in the abduction of the victim. There were intimate relations of Danish with the victim and as per the medical report she is over 18 years in age. There were a number of cases pending between the family of Nirmala and the victim and that the petitioner was a counsel for Nirmala in all those cases. In her statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has not made any such allegations against the petitioner.