Recently, the Allahabad High Court refused to quash criminal proceedings initiated against a person who was accused of posting nude photographs of his wife on WhatsApp messenger.
A Bench comprising Hon’ble Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Hon’ble Justice Vivek Agarwal of Allahabad HC ruled that a cognizable offence was made against the petitioner.
The observations mentioned above were made when the Bench was hearing a petition filed by the husband who prayed the Court to quash an FIR filed for offences u/s 313, 323, 376D, 270 and 34 of IPC and u/s 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2008.
Hon’ble Court was also requested to grant the petitioner protection from arrest during the investigation.
Submissions made by the Parties:-
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations were fabricated and false since the petitioner’s wife was 6 years elder to him and this the couple’s second marriage.
It was further stated that police had overlooked the facts mentioned above and the FIR was lodged on false grounds.
Another argument was that the FIR was lodged to extract money from the petitioner.
On the other hand, Learned AGA argued that just because the petitioner was the complainant’s husband, it would not constitute a valid ground for quashing of the FIR.
No Ground to Quash FIR that Husband Posted Nude Pics of Wife on Social Media: Allahabad HC
The Court relied on State of Haryana vs Bansilal and clarified that there could not be any interference with the investigation or possible arrest of the petitioner unless the cognizable offence were not ex-facie discernible from allegations made in the FIR or if there was any statutory provision that restricts the power of police to investigate such cases.
It was also ruled that prima facie, a cognisable offence was made out.
The petition was dismissed as no ground existed for quashing the FIR or staying the petitioner’s arrest.
Title: Dhananjay vs State of UP & Ors
Case No.: CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. – 12809 of 2020
Date of Order: 17.12.2020
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Hon’ble Justice Vivek Agarwal
Counsel for Petitioner:- Jata Shankar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent:- GA.