Allahabad High Court
TULSI PATHAK AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The High Court held that the FIR cannot be quashed and dismissed the writ petition.
Summary
Petitioners Tulsi Pathak and two others filed a criminal miscellaneous writ petition in the Allahabad High Court seeking quash of an FIR dated 21-02-2026, registered under sections 61(2) and 87 BNS, alleging that the alleged victim’s modesty was forcibly removed and no consent was given. The State, represented by the learned Additional Government Advocate, argued that the prosecutrix’s statement recorded under section 180 BNSS fully supports the FIR and that the petitioners’ innocence cannot be determined by the court. The petitioners were unable to rebut these submissions. The Court examined the record, found no merit in the petition to quash the FIR, and consequently dismissed the writ petition. The interim order previously granted was vacated. The decision leaves the FIR and the criminal proceedings against the petitioners undisturbed.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR registered under sections 61(2) and 87 BNS can be quashed on the ground of alleged lack of consent.
- Whether the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under section 180 BNSS suffices to sustain the FIR.
- Whether the High Court can intervene to determine the innocence of the accused in a criminal matter pending investigation.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 61(2), 87
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 180
Subjects
- FIR quash
- criminal writ petition
- section 61(2)
- section 87
- section 180
- sexual assault
- high court dismissal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 5108 of 2026
Tulsi Pathak And 2 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Girish Kumar Mishra, Hari Om Shukla
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 47
HON'BLE RAJEEV MISRA, J.
HON'BLE LAKSHMI KANT SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Mr. Hari Om Shukla, the learned counsel for petitioners and the
learned AGA representing State-respondent 1, 2 and 3.
2. Perused the record.
3. Petitioner Tulsi Pathak and two others have approached this Court by
means of present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated
21.02.2026 lodged by first informant/respondent 4, Sri Ramu Pathak and
registered as Case Crime No. 0066 of 2026, under section 61(2), 87 BNS,
Police Station Collector Bukganj, District Bareilly.
4. On the matter being taken up the learned AGA submits that petitioner 2
Vahid @ Bhura has been arrested whereas petitioner 1 Tulsi Pathak has
been recovered. It is then contended by the learned AGA that during
pendency of present writ petition the statement of prosecutrix was
recorded under section 180 BNSS wherein the prosecutrix has fully
supported the FIR.
5. As per the said statement the modesty of the prosecutrix was dislodged
deliberately and forcibly and no consent was given by the prosecutrix to
develop physical relation. On the above premise the learned AGA submits
that individual innocence of petitioners 2 and 3 cannot be undertaken by
this Court. As such the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
6. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for petitioners could
CRLP No. 5108 of 2026
2
not overcome the same.
7. Having heard the learned counsel for petitioners, the learned AGA
representing State-respondents 1, 2, 3, upon perusal of record and
considering the objections raised by the learned AGA in opposition to
present writ petition as noted herein above, we are of the view that no
good ground has emerged so as to quash the FIR. As a result the present
writ petition fails and is liable to be dismissed.
8. It is accordingly, dismissed.
9. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
(Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)
March 18, 2026
Arti
Digitally signed by :-
ARTI SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…