Cr.Misc. M 32700 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYNA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.Misc. M 32700 of 2010 Date of decision:22.11.2010 Ramesh Kumar Petitioner vs. State of Haryana and another Respondent Present: Mr. VK Kajla, Advocate. M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR, registered at the instance of Raj Bala levelling allegation of assault, outraging her modesty and rape. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is sufficient material available with the petitioner in the shape of documentary evidence to indicate that respondent No.2- complainant had got the FIR, registered against the petitioner as a sum of Rs.3 lacs had been taken by her husband as a loan from the petitioner. Complainant Raj Bala did not have good relations with her husband and she was assaulted by her husband and her brother-in-law, as such, she had filed a private complaint against the petitioner on the basis of the above said circumstances. It is contended that evidence of rape is not made out against the petitioner. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and prima facie of the opinion that the allegations of rape etc. against the petitioner are of weak nature but appreciating the defence of the petitioner at this stage, in exercise of powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C., it will not be appropriate to enter into the niceties of the trial and quash the FIR by converting the proceedings Cr.Misc. M 32700 of 2010 2 u/s 482 Cr.P.C. into proceedings of trial. In the interest of justice, instead of quashing the FIR, it is ordered that in case the trial is committed to the court of Sessions, the trial court will conclude the trial within a period of six months by recording the statement of complainant-respondent No.2 before other witnesses. Disposed of. All the pleas, which have been raised by the petitioner before this court, can be raised before the trial court at an opportune time. November 22 ,2010 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE