IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Farjand Ali, J.
Radhakrishan Meena & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan and ors. – Respondents
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4952 of 2020 Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5612 of 2020
Decided On : 23-02-2022
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 376-D, 418 and 506 - Scope of powers of High Court to quash FIR/complaint/all criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C – Offence of rape and Criminal intimidation - Seeking quash of FIR - Alleging that prosecutrix is a jail guard deployed at Central Jail - One Dinesh introduced her to petitioner. One Siya Ram, resident of village, who happens to be relative of complainant was also a tenant at same premises - Stated that said Dinesh frequently used to visit house where she and Siya Ram were residing and a good relationship had gradually developed between them - It is alleged in FIR that Dinesh told prosecutrix that a boy named Radha (present petitioner) is serving in Department of Customs at Gujarat and would be a suitable groom for her - Held, Indisputably there is a major discrepancy and conflict between report submitted by prosecutrix to Women Commission and impugned FIR which got lodged after few days of moving complaint to Commission - The major alteration & embellishment made in FIR impugned also casts a serious doubt over genuineness of allegations - Scope of powers of High Court to quash FIR/complaint/all criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in detail and has determined such instances where FIR/complaint/all criminal proceedings can be quashed - When a woman is married and educated, then, depending on facts of each case, she is supposed to be well aware of consequences of having sexual intercourse with a man prior to solemnizing of the marriage. In event of a consent obtained by fraud, inducement is a necessary ingredient. There must be some material on record to hold prima facie that girl was induced by the accused to such an extent that she was in agreement to have sexual intercourse with him - Criminal misc. petitions are allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant criminal misc. petitions have been preferred by the accused petitioners seeking quashing of FIR No. 36/2020 registered at P.S. Mahila Thana, Distt. Alwar for the offences under Sections 376-D, 418 and 506 IPC.
2. Bereft of elaborate details, the brief facts necessary for the disposal of these petitions are that at the behest of the complainant-respondent no.2, on 2.2.2020 the aforementioned FIR came to be lodged alleging inter alia that the prosecutrix is a jail guard deployed at Central Jail, Bikaner. In the year 2018, she was residing in a rented premises at Jaipur for the purpose of coaching for exams. One Dinesh Meena introduced her to the petitioner. One Siya Ram Meena, resident of village Nathalwada, who happens to be the relative of the complainant was also a tenant at the same premises. It is stated that said Dinesh Meena frequently used to visit the house where she and Siya Ram were residing and a good relationship had gradually developed between them. Dinesh Meena had taken her mobile number and often used to call on her mobile number. It is alleged in the FIR that Dinesh Meena told the prosecutrix that a boy named Radha Kishan Meena (the present petitioner) is serving in the Department of Customs at Gujarat and would be a suitable groom for her. The prosecutrix narrated all the things to her brother and other relatives. It is specifically mentioned in the FIR that brothers of the prosecutrix had bluntly refused to get the prosecutrix married with the present petitioner, rather the middleman Dinesh Meena was also sensitized not to make call to her in this regard. It is also alleged in the FIR that thereafter the accused petitioner frequently used to call her and she was coaxed to marry with him, for which ultimately the prosecutrix had consented. It is alleged that on 18.4.2018, she was called by the petitioner to meet with him, upon which she left her house and went outside the village, where the petitioner met her and she sat as a pillion rider on the motor cycle driven by the petitioner. It is alleged that she wanted to go to Jodhpur for physical examination related to recruitment process and for that purpose she asked the petitioner to drop her at Rajgarh Railway Station, but the accused did not stop the bike and took her away to Malviya Nagar, Alwar at the residence of a relative of accused petitioner. As per allegations, the prosecutrix was induced by the accused to develop physical relations and she surrendered herself before him on account of promise to marry her. The act of establishing the physical relationship, is alleged to have been done on 19.4.2018 at Malviya Nagar, Alwar at the residence of one Lekh Raj. After the incident, the prosecutrix was taken through a Motor Cycle to Bandikui Station, wherefrom she boarded to Jodhpur for the purpose of her physical examination on the post of Jail Constable. It is further alleged that after that incident, on several occasions, she was made to establish physical relation with the petitioner on account of the promise that the accused would marry her. Another incident, as shown in the FIR, is that when she was studying at Jaipur, on 18.6.2018, the accused came to her rented house and developed physical relationship with her. It is alleged that though she was not willing to surrender of her own accord but consented to it owing to the promise made by the petitioner that he would marry her, and that is why she submitted herself before the accused. It is further alleged that thereafter on several occasions, sexual inter-course was committed upon her at different places and lastly when she made a protest, she was threatened that an obscene video has been made with the petitioner in a compromising situation and if any report is moved, he will make the video viral in order to disrepute her in the society. After this incident, she has been continuously subjected to intercourse on account of threat of dire consequences. It is alleged in the FIR that
Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.
(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 distinction between a false promise to marry and a mere breach of promise, and the need for active and reasoned deliberation towards the proposed act to establish whether the consent was vitiated....
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.