The court established that consensual relationships, despite existing marriages, do not constitute criminal offences absent force or deception, allowing for quashing of wrongful prosecution.

JUDGMENT

Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. The Petitioners have instituted the present Criminal Miscellaneous Case under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973/ Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court, seeking quashing of the FIR and the Criminal Proceedings arising out of P.S. Case No.408 of 2023, corresponding to C.T. Case No.1152 of 2023, pending before the learned J.M.F.C, Chandikhole.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(i) On 04.07.2023 at about 9:30 P.M., one Barsharani Ojha submitted a written report before the I.I.C., Dharmasala Police Station. In the said report, she alleged that Petitioner No.1 had been in a love relationship with her for a considerable period of time. It was further alleged that they had gone to Puri together, where Petitioner No.1 promised to marry her. On the basis of such promise of marriage, Petitioner No.1 allegedly established physical relationship with the complainant on several occasions.

(ii) On 03.07.2023, the Petitioner No.1 allegedly informed the complainant over telephone that his marriage has been solemnized by his parents against his will. Thereafter, the Complainant went to the village of Petitioner No.1, where he allegedly denied having any love relationship her.

(iii) The Victim had left her matrimonial home and was residing at her parental house in village Odanga. She had instituted a divorce proceeding against her husband, which was subsequently allowed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Jajpur, and a decree of divorce was granted in her favour.

(iv) During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the witnesses, including that of the Victim. The Victim was sent for medical examination. Her wearing apparels and biological samples were seized and forwarded for chemical examination. The statement of the Victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. by the learned Magistrate.

(v) Thereafter, the Petitioner No.1 was arrested and forwarded to judicial custody. Upon completion of investigation, the police found that the Petitioner and the Victim had been in a love relationship for a considerable period of time.

(vi) On the basis of the written report, Dharamasala P.S. Case No. 408 of 2023 was registered. Under the completion of investigation, the police submitted chargesheet on 30.11.2023 under Section 341, 294, 323, 493, 417, 354, 506 and 34 of I.P.C. against the Petitioner No.1. The co-accused persons, namely Petitioner No.2 to 5, were charge-sheeted under Section 341, 294, 323, 354, 506 and 34 of I.P.C.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court by invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C./ Section 528 BNSS by filing the present CRLMC.

II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS

3. The learned counsel for the Petitioners earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions:

(i) The Petitioners submits that he and his family members have been falsely implicated in the present case, though they have no involvement in the alleged occurrence. It is further submitted that the medical examination report of the victim does not reveal any signs and symptoms suggestive of forcible sexual intercourse, nor does it disclose any bodily injury indicative of the alleged forcible sexual assault.

(ii) The Petitioners further submits that the contents of F.I.R., on the basis of which the criminal proceedings has been initiated against the Petitioners, are contrary to the documents annexed to the Petition. It is contended that the allegations made in t