1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. 21982-M of 2008 Date of Decision: 14.7.2009 *** Rakesh Kumar .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. .. Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. L.M. Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Bhavna Gupta, DAG Punjab *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. The petitioner has been booked in a case FIR No. 258 dated 24.5.2008, under Sections 376, 366-A IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Amritsar. The impugned FIR has been got registered by Smt. Sunita Rani-respondent No.2 with the allegations that he committed rape with her daughter on 11.3.2008 after abducting her from village Mustafabad. The FIR has been sought to be quashed on the ground that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not supported the case of the prosecution and has stated therein that the petitioner did not commit rape upon her. Therefore, it has been contended that the continuance of prosecution against the petitioner is bad in law. The arguments have been scanned. Merely because the prosecutrix has not named the petitioner in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as the person who committed rape with her, is no ground to quash the FIR. The same cannot be made the sole criterion to quash the FIR, which otherwise can be used for a very limited purposes i.e. for confronting the maker at the time of examination in the Court. The allegations against the accused are of rape and abduction of a minor girl. It has to bear in mind that judicial intervention at the threshold of the legal process initiated 2 against a person accused of committing offence is highly detrimental to the larger public and societal interest. The people and the society have a legitimate expectation that those committing offences either against an individual or the society are expeditiously brought to trial and, if found guilty, adequately punished. If the allegations contained in the FIR or complaint discloses commission of some crime, then the High Court, without going into merits and demerits of the allegations, must keep its hands off and refrain from passing order which may impede the trial. It is not the case where the allegations in the complaint do not disclose commission of any offence or that the prosecution of the petitioner would amount to miscarriage of justice. Thus, at this juncture, it is very pre-mature to quash the FIR merely on the basis of the statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. There is no merit in the instant petition, which is accordingly dismissed. However, whatever has been observed herein are without prejudice to the merits of the case. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE July 14,2009 Jiten