Forcible initial rape constitutes offence despite post-rape marriage promise, blackmail, and subsequent relations; prima facie case from prosecutrix solemn affirmation warrants trial, not quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the order dated 21.06.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khunti in connection with Complaint Case No. 55 of 2023 whereby and where under, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khunti has taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 376 (2) (n)/420 of the Indian Penal Code. During the pendency of the case as the application under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Khunti vide order dated 10.12.2024 in S.T. Case No. 36 of 2024 hence, the additional prayer was also made by way of amendment of this criminal miscellaneous petition, to quash and set aside the order dated 10.12.2024 passed in the said S.T. Case No. 36 of 2024.

3. It is submitted by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner that as yet charge has not been framed in S.T. Case No. 36 of 2024 and the trial is yet to begin.

4. The allegation against the petitioner is that consequent upon love developing between him and the prosecutrix, the petitioner invited the prosecutrix to his house. There was conversation between them and when the prosecutrix was about to leave the house of the petitioner, the petitioner forcibly told her to stay back and thereafter forcibly committed rape upon her, at which the prosecutrix raised uproar. Thereafter, the petitioner pressed the mouth of the prosecutrix and in the process the prosecutrix sustained some injury. As the prosecutrix started crying the petitioner promised to marry her. After commission of rape the prosecutrix left the house of the petitioner. Subsequently, when the prosecutrix was staying at Ranchi in Lalpur there also the petitioner came and established physical relationship with the prosecutrix and told the prosecutrix that he has captured the video of their first sexual encounter and started blackmailing the prosecutrix and by such blackmailing, the petitioner took Rs.50,000/- in cash and also took Rs.1,57,000/- through online mode, the proof of which the prosecutrix submitted in court.

5. The prosecutrix first lodged First Information Report. There was medical examination of her. The investigating officer of the case used to tell the prosecutrix that phones are coming from several places to manage the case and the same was recorded by the prosecutrix and the same was filed in the court in a pen drive. To a question from Court, the prosecutrix told that the petitioner committed rape upon her in her rented accommodation at Lalpur in Ranchi.

6. Police after investigation of the case found lack of evidence against the petitioner and submitted Final Form and did not send up the petitioner for trial. During the investigation of the case, statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix was recorded in which she stated that in the year 2017 for the first time, physical relationship was established between the petitioner and the prosecutrix. On that day, the prosecutrix refused to have physical relationship with the petitioner but the petitioner said that they will marry each other.

7. After submission of Final Form, the prosecutrix filed Protest-cum-Complaint Case No. 55 of 2023 and in her statement on solemn affirmation the prosecutrix has categorically stated that the petitioner invited her to his house, after there was love between them and w