The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for adequate evidence to show that the accused had no intention to marry the victim from the beginning, and the application of guidelines for quashing proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

M.W. CHANDWANI, J.

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The application seeks quashing of Sessions Case No. 569/2019 arising out of First Information Report (F.I.R.) No. 213/2019 registered with Police Station Beltarodi, District Nagpur for the offence punishable under Sections 376(2)(n) and 417 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C. for short).

3. The facts, which give rise to the present application, can be culled out as under:

On 26/07/2019, the victim lodged F.I.R. alleging that she got acquainted with the applicant through her sister Devita and was working as an Insurance Consultant with him. They used to meet and also used to go together for the purpose of work. The applicant proposed for marriage to the victim, to which she agreed. In the month of March 2016, the applicant took the victim on his bike for the purpose of work and thereafter to his house at Manish Nagar, Nagpur. In his house, the applicant established physical relations with the victim on the promise of marriage. Thereafter, the said physical relations continued at the rented room of the sister of the victim. The applicant also established physical relations with the victim at Hotel Green on the pretext of promise of marriage. Suddenly, the victim came to know that the applicant’s marriage is fixed with another girl and the engagement ceremony was also performed. Initially, on 16/07/2019, the victim lodged a complaint with Police Station Beltarodi, Nagpur, wherein the applicant was called. He informed to the Police that he is ready to perform the marriage with the victim, but his parents were not agreeing. The victim went to meet the father of the applicant, however, his father refused to agree for the marriage of the applicant with the victim. Therefore, on 26/07/2019, the victim lodged F.I.R. against the applicant, on which the aforesaid offences came to be registered. Thus, in the complaint, the victim alleged that by giving false promise of marriage, the applicant kept physical relations with her.

4. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions vide Sessions Case No. 569/2019. The applicant applied under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. for discharge from the case. By the impugned order, the application for discharge (Exh.11) came to be rejected by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The applicant approached this Court for quashing of the said sessions case.

5. Heard Mr. J.M. Gandhi, learned Counsel for the applicant as well as Mr. S.A. Ashirgade, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State assisted by Ms. A.P. Murrey, learned Counsel for non-applicant No. 1.

6. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, by relying on the averments in the F.I.R. submits that the victim is a 33 year old girl. The physical relations between the applicant and the victim were consensual and were out of love affair. From 2016, according to him, the applicant was rather ready to marry the victim, but the victim was not interested at all, and thereafter all of a sudden, when the applicant got an attractive job and engagement of the applicant with another girl was performed, she took a U-turn and lodged false complaint against the applicant. According to him, the WhatsApp chats would reveal that it is the victim, who initially denied to get married. Even, the allegations in the F.I.R. and the material collected by the prosecution in the charge-sheet are accepted as it is, they show that physical relations between the applicant and the victim were consensual and no offence under Section 376(2)(n) of I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. Subsequently, the victim got married to one Aman Chandrakant Sharma on 17/08/2021.

7. Per contra, the learned A.P.P. strenuously urged that the contents of the F.I.R. clearly make out a case that the consent of the victim was obtained under false promise of marriage and since incepti