IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that a lack of prima facie evidence in the FIR and subsequent statements can justify quashing of criminal proceedings under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

VINAY JOSHI, J. - Heard.

2. Admit.

3. This is an application in term of Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code') seeking to quash First information Report ('FIR') as well as charge-sheet relating to Crime No. 293/2019 for the offence punishable under Ss. 376, 354, 506, 109, 509 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered with Police Station Chimur, Tah. Chimur, Dist. Chandrapur.

4. It is applicant's case that the entire allegations of sexual assault are against co-accused Sudhakar. Besides vague reference about applicants conversation with victim at the instance of co-accused Sudhir, there is nothing against him. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that, the material collected by the Police fells short to make out prima facie case against the applicant. Continuation of such prosecution amounts to abuse of the process of the Court, and therefore, the quashing is sought.

5. Learned APP as well as learned counsel appearing for the informant resisted the application. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Sec. 164 of the Code, has specifically stated about sexual assault on the part of the applicant. It is submitted that, the Court cannot embark upon the appreciation of evidence while considering application under Sec. 482 of the Code. At this stage, the Court is not required to conduct the mini trial. With these contentions, application is prayed to be rejected.

6. The prosecution case can be stated in brief that, at the instance of report lodged by victim married lady aged 28 years, the crime has been registered. It is victim's case that co-accused Sudhakar was running a Pan stall in the village. In the month of January 2019, co- accused Sudhakar accosted her in the way, gave her lift on two wheeler. After few days, the applicant who is neighbouring agriculturist, said to the victim that co-accused Sudhakar loves her (victim) and asked her (victim) to comply his wishes.

7. Victim stated that in the month of February 2019, Sudhakar came to her field and under pretext of demanding drinking water, caught hold her hands, but somehow, she rescued herself. She stated that on 25/5/2019, Sudhakar came to her field, caused her to lay down, and had forcible sexual intercourse with her. On 27/5/2019 also once again he had forcible sexual intercourse with her in the field. At that time, victim's mother-in-law arrived, on which Sudhakar fled. Victim stated that on 28/5/2019, she had disclosed the things to her husband, and then she gathered courage and filed report.

8. It reveals from the FIR dtd. 14/7/2019 that the entire allegations of forcible sexual assault are against co-accused Sudhakar. The report bears a reference that somewhere in the month of January 2019, the applicant asked victim to satisfy the wishes of Sudhakar.

9. Victim's statement was recorded by learned Judicial Magistrate on 29/7/2019 in terms of Sec. 164 of the Code. This time, she added that in the month of March 2019, when Sudhakar committed forcible sexual intercourse, applicant Vinod also had sexual intercourse with her. She added that at that time, both of them took her photographs.

10. Apparently, the FIR is totally silent about the sexual assault made by applicant Vinod. Learned counsel appearing for applicant took us through supplementary statement of victim dtd. 16/8/2020 which was recorded after victim's statement under Sec. 164 of the Code. In the said later statement victim said nothing about sexual assault on the part of the applicant, but reiterated the contents of FIR. In other words, in the supplementary statement, she merely stated about the sexual assault by co-accused Sudhakar only. The role assigned to the applicant was only to the extent of communication with the victim about the wishes of Sudhakar.

11. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that in the FIR as well as supplementary statement, victim said nothing against the applicant and thus, the victim's statem