The significance of delay in filing an FIR in cases of sexual assault, the importance of prompt and early reporting of the occurrence, and the impact of contradictions in witness testimony and previous enmity and animosity between the parties on the quashing of a complaint and consequential proceedings.

JUDGMENT

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. - The petitioner is 80 years of old retired ex-serviceman and has sought quashing of criminal complaint and also all subsequent proceedings being instituted against him by the respondent under Sections 354, 341, 504 and 506 IPC and is pending adjudication in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jogindernagar, District Mandi, H.P.

2. In the complaint it was alleged that on 19.9.2017 at about 6.00 p.m. when the complainant was returning from her field and going towards her residence then at that time the petitioner stopped her and caught hold of her right hand with bad intention and told her that "Randi ether udhar ghumti reheti hai per peshi mei hazir nahi hoti hai". Upon this, she raised hue and cry and on hearing her cries, her husband came out of the house and upon warning given by him (husband), the petitioner left her by saying that he would see her. Even though, the alleged incident was stated to have taken place on 19.9.2017, however, the complaint came to be filed against the petitioner only after a delay of 4 days i.e. on 22.9.2017 and this delay in fact forms the anchor-sheet of the petitioner''s case assailing the maintenance of the criminal complaint. In addition thereto, quashing of the complaint is sought on the ground that the complainant/respondent apart from examining herself and her husband has failed to examine any independent witness, therefore also, the complaint was liable to be quashed.

3. Lastly, quashing is sought on the ground that there is animosity and enmity between the petitioner and the respondent and, therefore, he has been falsely implicated in the case and the same should therefore be quashed.

4. Normally, a woman would not put her honour at stake by levelling allegations of outrage of her modesty. The delay in lodging an FIR or a complaint, as the case may be, could be due to variety of reasons, particularly, the reluctance of the prosecutrix or her family members to approach the police or Court and lodging the complaint about the incident, which concerns the reputation and honour of the family and victim. Ordinarily, the family would not intend to get a stigma attached to the family. In other words, the delay in lodging an FIR in a sexual assault cannot be equated with the cases involving other offences.

5. The delay per se is not a mitigating circumstance for the accused when accusations of offence of sexual assault be it modesty or rape. The delay in lodging the FIR or complaint cannot be used as ritualistic formula for discarding the prosecution case and doubting its authenticity. It only puts the court on guard to search for and consider if any explanation has been offered for the delay. Once it is offered the Court is to only see whether it is satisfactory or not. In case the complainant fails to satisfactorily explain the delay and there is possibility of embellishment or exaggeration in the version putforth by her on account of such delay, then it obviously is a relevant factor.

On the other hand, satisfactory explanation of delay is weightly enough to reject the plea of false implication or vulnerability of prosecution case.

6. As observed above, normally the version of the prosecutrix regarding outraging of her modesty, is accepted by the Court, but this is not an universal law and would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The Court has to scrutiny the testimony of the complainant and the other material on record. The Courts normally insist for prompt and immediate lodging of FIR or complaint, as the case may be. In the case of FIR, idea is that it would give the prosecution a twin advantage. First is that it affords commencement of the investigation without any time lapse; second is that it expels the opportunity for any possible concoction of a false version. Barring these two plus points for a promptly lodged FIR, the demerits of the delayed FIR cannot operate as fatal to any prosecution case. Though, it cannot be o