JUDGMENT :

1. By way of this application, the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the criminal complaint being C.R. No. I – 19 of 2016 registered with Kakrapar Police Station, District : Tapi under Section 376 of IPC dated 09.06.2016 and all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. The facts in brief are that on 09.06.2016 the respondent No.2 herein filed the impugned complaint inter alia alleging that she is a 32 years old lady serving with NACIL as Air Hostess. She and the applicant accused met on a Social Networking Site and subsequently, developed friendly relations. They exchanged their Telephone Numbers / E-mail ID’s with each other and used to chat on daily basis. It is alleged that on 30.05.2016 the applicant-accused sent a Taxi from Vyara so that the respondent-complainant could visit him at his place. The respondent complainant went to the place of the applicant in the said Taxi. It is alleged that the applicant-accused had informed the respondent complainant that he is unmarried and had proposed to marry the respondent-complainant. Thereafter, they developed physical relations. It is further alleged that after few days, when the respondent-complainant asked the applicant about their marriage, the applicant refused to marry her and instead informed her that he was already married. Therefore, the impugned complaint under Section 376 IPC came to be filed.

3. Mr. Hiren Modi, learned advocate for the applicant, submitted that the averments made in the impugned complaint itself suggests that the sexual relation between the parties was consensual in nature. At the relevant time, the respondent-complainant was a married woman as she was already married to one Vikrant Mahadev Ghate, who was a Pilot by profession. The said marriage had taken place on 28.04.2008. In April 2011, the respondent-complainant had filed a criminal complaint under Section 498A of IPC and allied sections against her husband – Vikrant Mahadev Ghate.

3.1 The learned advocate further submitted that the respondentcomplainant is in the habit of filing frivolous complaints. One such complaint being C.R. No. I – 516 of 2015 was filed by the respondent complainant at Halasur Police Station, Bangalore City, Karnataka against one Prabhajit Singh, a resident of Karnataka State, under Sections 376 and 420 of IPC. It was, therefore, urged that the impugned complaint is nothing but an abuse and misuse of the Court process and it deserves to be quashed and set aside.

4. In this matter, initially, Notice came to be issued on 25.07.2016. However, fresh Notice came to be issued on 11.08.2016, as the Court was informed that the father of the respondent-complainant had refused to accept the Notice of this Court when it was attempted to be served at the given address of the respondent-complainant. It appears that the fresh Notice issued by this Court was duly served upon the respondent no.2- complainant on 31.08.2021, which is evident from the Service Affidavit produced on record. Thus, though served, the respondent-complainant has chosen not to appear before the Court or to appoint anyone to represent her case for all these years. Hence, the Court has no other option but to proceed with the matter on merits.

5. Learned APP Mr. Trivedi submitted that the applicant initially, lured the respondent-complainant to enter into a friendly relation with him and thereafter, made false promise to the respondent-complainant that he would marry her with a view to develop physical relations with her. The applicant took advantage of the situation though he was married at the relevant time. It was, therefore, prayed that no discretion be exercised in favour of the applicant.

6. Having heard the learned advocates, the question, which, essentially, comes up for consideration of this Court in this application is whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the alleged act of