IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J.
Aishwarya Bindal – Petitioner
Versus
The State, Govt. of N.C.T. of Delhi & Another – Respondent
Crl.M.C. No. 177 of 2021 & Crl.M.A.No.901 of 2021 (stay)
Decided On : 11-02-2021
Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 509, 377, 313, 506, 376(2)(n) I.P.C. - The court held that the powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C are unlimited and that in the interest of justice the High Court can make such orders as may be necessary to prevent abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. However, the High Court should not evaluate the truthfulness or correctness of the allegations levelled by the prosecution/complainant against the accused. The court also emphasized that the material relied on by the accused is not of such nature and is not sufficient to completely reject and over-rule the assertions contained in the complaint. The trial court is directed to complete the trail expeditiously, not later than one year from today.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner is accused of committing rape on the prosecutrix. The allegation in the FIR is that the prosecutrix met her friend, who introduced the petitioner/accused to the prosecutrix and the accused established physical relationship with the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage. The petitioner was arrested and charges were framed against him for offences punishable under Sections 376, 377, 376(2)(n), 509, 313, 323, 506 IPC.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the material relied on by the accused is not sufficient to completely reject and over-rule the assertions contained in the complaint. The trial court is directed to complete the trail expeditiously, not later than one year from today.
Issues: The issues revolved around the allegations of rape and the petitioner's defense of false allegations and blackmail by the prosecutrix.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the High Court should not evaluate the truthfulness or correctness of the allegations levelled by the prosecution/complainant against the accused. The material relied on by the accused is not of such nature and is not sufficient to completely reject and over-rule the assertions contained in the complaint.
Final Decision: The revision petition is dismissed with the above observations along with the pending application.
JUDGMENT :
1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing F.I.R. No.338/2019, dated 06.09.2019, registered at Police Station Janakpuri, Delhi, for offences under Sections 509, 377, 313, 506, 376(2)(n) I.P.C.
2. The petitioner is accused of committing rape on the prosecutrix. The allegation in the FIR is that the prosecutrix met her friend, one Isha Gupta resident of Sarai Rohilla, Delhi, who introduced the petitioner/accused to the prosecutrix by stating that the accused is her friend. It is stated in the FIR that after two or three days Isha Gupta told the prosecutrix that the petitioner/accused wanted to meet her and wants to be friends with her. It is stated in the FIR that the prosecutrix refused this proposal by stating that she will only accept friendship from such a person who will marry her. Despite that the said Isha Gupta gave the mobile number of the prosecutrix to the accused. It is stated in the FIR that the accused started talking to the prosecutrix and insisted on meeting her. It is stated that on 03.03.2019, the accused and the prosecutrix met at hotel Oyo Town Pankha Road, Janakpuri. It is stated in the FIR that in the hotel the accused promised marriage and pressurized her to establish physical relationship with the prosecutrix. It is stated that in April, 2019 the accused came to the house of the prosecutrix and promised that he will talk to his mother about their marriage and established physical relationship with her. It is further stated in the FIR that later the accused called the prosecutrix to Karnal on the pretext of meeting his mother and for discussion about their marriage, the prosecutrix was put up at hotel Gopinath Grand, near Dayal Singh College, Karnal and he established physical relationship with her stating that he will introduce the prosecutrix to his mother. It is alleged that the accused forced her to have unnatural sex. It is stated that after that incident the prosecutrix had a fight with the accused but the accused assured her that he will marry the prosecutrix within 15 days. It is further stated that on 27.07.2019, once again, under the pretext of meeting his mother, the accused took the prosecutrix to hotel Yellow Sparrow, Namaste Chowk, Karnal where the prosecutrix told the accused that she is pregnant with the child of the accused. It is stated in the FIR that despite being told that the prosecutrix is pregnant the accused established physical relationship with her and it is alleged that the accused mixed some medicine in the food of the prosecutrix because of which the prosecutrix had a miscarriage. It is stated that on 25.08.2019, once again the accused called the prosecutrix to Karnal, admitted his guilt and established physical relationship with her. It is stated that after the act the accused refused to marry the prosecutrix and that he told her that he has already used her and that now she is of no use to him. It is stated in the FIR that the accused also threatened that he will put her photo on the internet which would tarnish her image. It is stated that after that incident, despite repeated attempts, the accused refused to marry the prosecutrix. It is also stated that the prosecutrix tried to contact the mother of the accused who threatened her that she will get cases filed against her and further she was threatened of dire consequences.
3. On the complaint of the prosecutrix, FIR No.338/2019 dated 06.09.2019, was registered at Police Station Janakpuri, Delhi for offences under Sections 509, 377, 313, 506, 376(2)(n) I.P.C. The petitioner was arrested on 12.09.2019 and has been released on bail on 18.11.2019. Arguments on charge were heard on 29.01.2020. The Additional Session Judge, South-West Dwarka Courts, Delhi, discharged the relatives of the accused but has held that there is substantial material on record to frame charges against the accused for offences punishabl
The High Court should not evaluate the truthfulness or correctness of the allegations levelled by the prosecution/complainant against the accused. The material relied on by the accused should be suff....
It is necessary to examine FIR, statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate First Class to find out correct factual matrix of issue - Sum and substance of decis....
The court emphasized that when a victim alleges rape and states there was no consent, the presumption under Section 114A of the IPC must apply, reinforcing that such matters must be resolved in a ful....
The court ruled that allegations of rape under Section 376 IPC were not established, allowing quashing of the FIR based on the consensual nature of the relationship and the parties' subsequent marria....
(1) Rape – In every case of rape, act of sexual intercourse must be forcible and without consent of woman/lady – Consent obtained by fraud amounts to no consent.(2) Misconception of fact – Breach of ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.