Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 11 August, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:7048
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No.1428 of 2022
11th August, 2025
Manvi ..........Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and another ..........Respondent
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate for the applicant, through video
conferencing.
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, D.A.G. with Mr. Vikash Uniyal, B.H. for the
State.
Mr. Chetan Joshi, Advocate for respondent no.2, through video
conferencing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
This C482 application is filed by the applicant
for quashing the summoning order dated 28.04.2022 as
well as Charge Sheet dated 23.08.2021 and further to set
aside Special Sessions Trial No. 42 of 2022, State vs. Dr.
Manvi under Sections 376, 120, 420 and 197 of IPC and
Section 21 POCSO registered at Police Station Nehru
Colony, District Dehradun, pending in the Court’s Ld
Special Judge POCSO/ADJ, Dehradun.
2. Facts of the prosecution story in a nutshell are
that it has been alleged through District Child Welfare
Committee the informant got to know about an incident
which occurred on 19.03.2021 at Rudraya Hospital
regarding physical assault upon the alleged victim aged
about 13 years by one Sandeep, aged about 17 years,
which resulted in pregnancy of the said victim who thereby
delivered a baby and the applicant by forging the
documents delivered the baby and handed it over to one
1
2025:UHC:7048
Swadesh, wife of Deepak Kumar on 19.03.2021. It has been
alleged against the applicant that she illegally delivered the
said child and issued forged birth certificate and also
conspirated with Sandeep to rape the victim.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
applicant that the applicant is a well known practicing
doctor in Rudraya Hospital and has good reputation in
public. He submits that she has been falsely roped in the
present case and that the alleged victim was admitted in
the said hospital on 19.03.2021 through her mother and
the doctor was informed that she is 20 years of age. He
further submits that the applicant upon her duty as a
responsible and professional doctor and was not aware of
the victim’s actual age. He also submits that the
documents regarding the birth of the child was prepared by
her in good faith. When she got to know about the alleged
crime, she fully cooperated with the investigation officer
and provided entire medical records to the investigating
officer.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently
argued that even if the allegations in the FIR are admitted
for a moment, offences under Section 376 read with 120
IPC cannot be made out against her as the alleged rape
would have happened around nine months ago and at that
moment of time, the applicant did not even know the victim
or the alleged assaulter. He also submits that as the
applicant made the birth certificate in good faith, therefore,
she cannot be charged with section 420 and 197 IPC and
as she had no knowledge about the alleged incident and
the actual age of the victim, section 21 of POCSO cannot be
alleged against her. Learned counsel for the applicant
2
2025:UHC:7048
further submits that the investigation officer without
proper investigation has submitted the charge sheet
against the applicant and the learned court has in
furtherance without application of judicial mind has taken
cognizance against the applicant and issued the impugned
summons.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the State
submits that the investigating officer after a detailed
investigation and after recording the statement of the
witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., and the victim
under Section 164 of Cr.P.C and after going through the
DNA report has rightly submitted the charge sheet against
the applicant and the learned court has on the basis of
detailed investigation and the charge sheet has rightly
issued summons against the applicant.
6. Respondent no.2 in his counter affidavit submits
that he is the state coordinator of Bachpan Bachao
Andolan of Noble Laureate Kailash Satyarthi and is actively
engaged in protecting children’s right. He submits that he
is the informant of the FIR and lodged the FIR when he got
to know about the alleged rape incident and forgery
committed by the applicant. He further submits that it is a
settled law that evidence produced by the accused in his
defence cannot be looked into by the High Court except in
exceptional circumstances.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and after perusal of material available on record, this Court
is of the considered opinion that the bare perusal of the FIR
and other material available on record go on to show that
the applicant could not in any circumstance have known,
the victim or the assaulter at the alleged date of incident of
rape, therefore, she could not have been charged under
3
2025:UHC:7048
section 376 read with 120 IPC, therefore, this Court deems
it fit that proceedings under these sections be immediately
quashed to prevent abuse of process of law and to further
the ends of justice. But as the other charges framed against
the applicant involve disputed set of facts the truth of
which can only be found out by a detailed trial, therefore, it
will be in the interest of justice, the applicant is subjected
to a trial by the trial court for the remaining offences.
8. Accordingly the present C482 application is
hereby partly allowed. The impugned summoning order is
quashed to the extent of Sections 376, 120 IPC qua the
applicant. The proceedings against the applicant for the
offences punishable under Section 376 and 120 IPC are
hereby quashed. However, so far as the offence under
Sections 420, 197 IPC and 21 of POCSO Act are concerned,
the applicant would face trial under said sections.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
11.08.2025
Nahid
4
[ad_1]
Source link