JUDGMENT :

1. Present petition is preferred under section 397 read with section 401 Cr.P.C. against order on charge dated 14.02.2017 and order framing charge dated 22.02.2017 passed by learned ASJ, FTC, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in SC 9416/2016 arising from FIR No.305/2016 registered at Police Station Vasant Vihar for offences punishable under sections 376/377/420 IPC.

2. It is stated in present petition that above FIR came to be registered on a complaint dated 08.04.2014 for an incident which purportedly took place on 12.08.2013. Entire substance of accusation is based on the allegation that having entered into a settlement dated 13.02.2012 and promising to pay a sum of Rs.9 Crore towards permanent alimony, petitioner induced complainant to execute settlement deed dated 31.08.2012 and obtained divorce by making a payment of Rs.5 Crores (Rs.2.5 Crore in favour of their daughter and Rs.2.5 crore in favour of the complainant). It has been alleged that after obtaining divorce on 04.09.2012, the petitioner did not pay any money to complainant in terms of agreement dated 13.02.2012 thereby cheated the complainant. It has further been alleged that despite verbally demanding for an amount payable under agreement dated 13.02.2012, the petitioner refused to make any payment. In order to avoid payment to complainant, petitioner induced her with a false promise of marriage (re-marriage) stating that upon marriage, the question of payment of such amounts would not arise. By making false promise of marriage, petitioner indulged in a physical relation with complainant on 12.08.2013.

3. Ms. Rebeeca M. John, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that Ld. Trial Court discharged the petitioner for the offence punishable u/s 420 IPC and proceeded to frame charge u/s 376 (2)(n) IPC. Background of the case is that on 21.11.1992, complainant and petitioner got married in New Delhi. The couple got two children from the wedlock, son (presently aged about 19 years) and daughter (presently aged about 15 years). In 2010, due to relationship of the complainant with one Sumit Walia, petitioner and complainant decided to withdraw their matrimonial company from each other after 18 years of marriage. On 06.02.2012, petitioner and complainant presented first motion application under section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of their marriage. Therein, petitioner paid a sum of Rs.5 lacs out of Rs.1 crore towards permanent alimony and maintenance which was mutually agreed between the parties. From 15.02.2012 to 30.08.2012, petitioner and complainant held various meetings and prepared various agreements to decide the terms of settlement, including matters pertaining to custody and permanent maintenance. However, due to various differences, same could not be finalized. On 31.08.2012, petitioner and complainant executed Settlement Agreement enumerating various terms of settlement between the parties. The said Settlement Agreement was made part and parcel of the second motion petition and acknowledged by complainant in her statement made before the court. The parties inter-alia agreed that complainant would receive a sum of Rs.2.5 Crores and their daughter would receive Rs.2.5 Crores towards maintenance. Consequently, on 04.09.2012, marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce and all monies payable under the agreement dated 31.08.2012 were tendered and accepted by complainant.

4. Learned senior counsel further submitted that on 08.09.2012, petitioner preferred a complaint against above named Sumit Walia which was registered as FIR No.294/12 with PS Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, u/s 384/506/509 IPC and 66(1)/67 of the Information Technology Act 2000, on the allegations that Sumit Walia demanded Rs.40 lacs from complainant and threatened to circulate nude pictures and video of complainant to malign her image. Said case is presently under investigation and is pending before Cyber Cell of EOW, Delhi Police.

5