Jasmit Singh vs State of J&K - 2021 Supreme(J&K) 414

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(J&K) 414

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Rajnesh Oswal, J.
Jasmit Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K and Ors. – Respondents
CRM(M) No.249/2019 (O&M)
Decided On : 03-11-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondent(s) Nos.1 and 2: Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG
For the Respondent(s) No.3:Mr. Ayushman Kotwal, Advocate

Headnote:
Ranbir Penal Code, 1989-Section 376-Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Sections 156(3) and 482-Rape-Quashing Petition-When there is allegation that sexual relationships were made on the basis of false promise of marriage, then it has to be established that promise of marriage was a false promise, given in bad faith and with no intention of being adhered to at the time it was given-There is marital discord between respondent No. 3 and her husband-It is difficult to comprehend as to how petitioner could have married her, when she was already married-More so, even allegations regarding physical relations made between petitioner and respondent No. 3 are vague-No year, month and dates have been mentioned when such relations were made and on the basis of such allegations no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against accused-No offence under Section 376 RPC against petitioner is made out and continuance of FIR impugned shall be nothing but abuse of process of law-FIR quashed. (Paras 17, 19 and 21)
Result-Petition allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Rajnesh Oswal, J.

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of FIR bearing No. 0051 dated 06.04.2019 for commission of offence under section 376 RPC registered with Police Station, R. S. Pura at the instance of respondent No. 3.

2. It is stated that the respondent No. 3 who is resident of a nearby village of the petitioner, was known to the petitioner. The petitioner went to the Cyprus Europe in the year, 2008 and came back to India in the year, 2013. The respondent No. 3 got married with one Manjeet Singh of Gurdaspur in the year, 2015 and settled in her matrimonial home after marriage. It is further stated that after some years of marriage, she came back to her village and coincidently met the petitioner at Talli Sahib Gurudwara in the year, 2016 and told the petitioner that she was having a marital dispute with her husband as well as her in-laws and she had been residing with her parents now. The respondent No. 3 has also filed a petition under the Domestic Violence Act against her husband as well as in-laws.

3. It is further stated that thereafter the respondent No. 3 started becoming friendly with the petitioner while visiting the Gurudwara and started calling the petitioner on mobile. It was in the year, 2018, the respondent No. 3 started emotional blackmailing the petitioner by telling him that she was depressed and did not want to live but the petitioner took it lightly however, the respondent No. 3 started asking the petitioner to marry her which the petitioner refused as the respondent No. 3 was already married and her marriage was subsisting. Even otherwise the petitioner never had any such feelings towards her. It is further stated that the respondent No. 3 started requesting the petitioner for some monetary help to contest the litigation with the husband as well as her in-laws and the petitioner gave a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the respondent No. 3.

4. The petitioner claims to have suffered shocked of his life when in the first week of March, 2019, the respondent No. 3 threatened the petitioner to pay Rs. 5 lacs to her otherwise she would file a case of rape against the petitioner. On 4th or 5th of March, the petitioner got a call from a mobile bearing No 8716897851 and the person calling the petitioner identified himself as Advocate Harpreet Singh who told the petitioner that the respondent No. 3 was going to file a complaint against the petitioner for raping her on the promise of marriage and in case the petitioner paid a sum of Rs. 5 lacs, then the matter could be settled. The petitioner refused to pay anything and on 10.03.2019 he was called by the Police from Police Station, R. S. Pura and as the petitioner went to the Police Station, he was detained and taken in custody and on enquiry, the Police told him that the respondent No. 3 had filed a complaint against the petitioner under section 376 RPC and in case the petitioner wanted to compromise with the respondent No. 3, he would be released from custody.

5. It is further stated that as the petitioner was left with no option but to compromise, otherwise he would have been falsely implicated in the false case under section 376 RPC ruining the life of the petitioner, he agreed to give Rs. 1.50 lacs to the respondent No. 3 under duress and after the family of the petitioner paid her the said amount, the respondent No. 3 gave the statement to the Police that she did not want to press her complaint against the petitioner whereupon the petitioner was released from the custody on 13.03.2019.

6. It is further averred that to the surprise of the petitioner, the respondent No. 3 again started blackmailing the petitioner demanding Rs. 3.5 lacs more from the petitioner but as the petitioner was not having that amount, he refused to pay the same. Thereafter, the respondent No. 3 came to the petitioner and told him that she had lodged the FIR against the petitioner under section 376 RPC in the Police Station, R. S. Pura and in case the petition