IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, J.
Tarek Aziz Laskar @ Tarik Ali Laskar, S/o. Nurul Islam Laskar & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Assam, Rep. by the PP, Assam & Ors. - Respondents
Crl. Pet. No. 225 of 2022
Decided On : 09-05-2023
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482, 161 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 120B, 376 - Criminal conspiracy - Forcefully had physical relation against her will - Quash FIR - Petitioners filed application with prayer for quashing FIR – Held, Victim’s allegations that petitioner no. 2 and his wife called off marriage between petitioner and victim, as victim was unable to fulfill conditions precedent to their marriage has not been mentioned in FIR - Petitioner no. 2 is also not booked under Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 - Moreover, no case under Section 120B/376 IPC is made out against petitioner No. 2 - It is not believable that a father will hatch up a conspiracy with his son and be a party to a criminal conspiracy abetting his son, petitioner No. 1 to commit an offence under Section 376 IPC - Possibility of conviction of petitioner no. 2 under Section 120B/376 IPC appears to be remote and bleak, which will indeed be an abuse of process of Court - So case against petitioner No. 2 only, is hereby set aside and quashed - Petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners assisted by learned counsel Ms. S.B. Choudhury. Also heard Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Addl. P.P. for respondent No. 1 and Mr. S.B. Laskar, learned counsel representing respondent No. 2.
2. The petitioners have filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.PC for short) with prayer for quashing the FIR being Dispur P.S. Case No. 874/2021 (G.R. Case No. 3820/2021) under Sections 120B/376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) and the Charge Sheet No. 270/2021 dated 31.08.2021 as well as the proceedings in the G.R. Case No. 3820/2021. The petitioners in this case are [1] Tarek Aziz Laskar @ Tarik Ali Laskar and [2] Nurul Islam Laskar. The victim, respondent No. 2 will also be referred to as ‘X’.
3. The genesis of the case was that the victim ‘X’ lodged an FIR against the present petitioners and a third accused namely Rahima Begum Laskar. The victim embarked upon her duty as an Office Assistant in Dispur Polyclinic & Nursing Home from 5th November, 2019. She got acquainted to the petitioner No. 1 through social media, Facebook. The petitioner No. 1 pursued her and he also introduced her to his parents who are arrayed as Accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the FIR. There was a discussion between the victim’s parents and the parents of petitioner No. 1 regarding marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and the victim ‘X’. The petitioner No. 1’s parents also met the victim in the hospital and the victim also visited them at “Dispur Lodge”. Again on 05.02.2020, the accused No. 3 came to Guwahati for routine checkup and met the victim at Dispur Polyclinic & Nursing Home. Thereafter the petitioner No. 1 took the victim ‘X’ to Dispur Lodge for fixing the date of their marriage. The Accused No. 3 was ailing and the victim ‘X’ introduced the accused to a Doctor and the victim ‘X’ helped to provide treatment to the accused No. 3. It is further alleged through the FIR that the petitioner No. 1 in a tacit manner took her to Dispur Lodge for discussion of her marriage and forcefully had physical relation against her will and asked her not to divulge the incident. On the insistence of the victim ‘X’ all the accused visited her house at Guwahati on 30th September, 2020 and fixed the marriage between the victim ‘X’ and the petitioner No. 1 in the month of April, 2021. Her parents made an announcement of her marriage with petitioner No. 1 and all her relatives got to know about her marriage. Her parents also incurred expenditure of Rs. 20 lacs by obtaining loans from various sources. The petitioner No. 1 also took the victim ‘X’ to his residence at Hailakandi and kept her for three days and with the help of accused Nos. 2 and 3 the petitioner No. 1 compelled ‘X’ to have physical relation during her stay at Hailakandi. When the victim ‘X’ returned home from Hailakandi, her parents asked the Accused No. 2 i.e. the petitioner No. 2 and the accused No. 3 about fixing the date of marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and the victim, then the accused Nos. 2 and 3 declined to go ahead with their marriage plans, stating that the petitioner No. 1 was still unemployed. Aggrieved by the conduct of the accused and on being cheated by them the victim ‘X’ lodged an FIR against the petitioners which was registered as Dispur P.S. Case No. 874/2021 under Sections 120B/176 IPC. The Investigating Officer conducted the investigation and submitted charge-sheet against all the three accused under the aforesaid sections of law.
4. The petitioners have admitted that they have met the victim in Dispur Polyclinic & Nursing Home when they came for treatment of accused No. 3. They admitted that the victim ‘X’ helped them during the treatment of the accused No. 3 and both the families have established a good relation as they hailed from Hailakandi. Subsequent thereto the victim’s parents proposed marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and the victim, which was however not ac
Legal proposition in respect of quashing of FIR/Complaint and criminal proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
A consensual relationship does not constitute rape unless it is shown that consent was obtained through deceit or coercion, with no intention of marriage from the beginning.
In cases where the parties are in a consensual relationship and have arrived at a settlement, the court may quash the FIR and proceedings if the continuation of the proceedings would serve no useful ....
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....
(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 ....
The main legal point established is that the court is not required to conduct a mini trial while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and that only a prima facie case needs to be established to....
Consent obtained under false promises must be proven as deceitful for a rape charge to be valid.
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.