The High Court's extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is not to be exercised without compelling evidence and must follow the proper procedural route through the Illaqa/Jurisdictional Magistrate.

JUDGMENT :

Mr. Sumeet Goel, J.:- The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘BNSS, 2023’) seeking directions to respondent Nos.3 and 4 to decide the representation dated 22.09.2024 (Annexure P-1) of the petitioner in accordance with the law and register an FIR under the relevant provision of the BNSS, 2023 in view of the judgment passed in case of Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., (2014) 2 SCC 1. Additionally, the petitioner has requested for fair and thorough investigation into the allegations of rape, cruelty, illegal divorce and threats to her life. Further direction has also been sought by the petitioner to provide her adequate security against continuous threats from respondent Nos.5 to 10.

2. The brief facts of the case as narrated in the present petition are that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with respondent No.5 on 16.03.2014, as per muslim rites and ceremonies. Initially, the petitioner was treated well by her in-laws. However, after the birth of a girl child, the in- laws of the petitioner started harassing & taunting her for not having a male child. It was further alleged that the husband of the petitioner namely Mohd. Salim (respondent No.5 herein) physically assaulted the petitioner and committed forcible rape upon her. Furthermore in the year 2017, when the husband of the petitioner went to Kuwait, her brother-in-law namely Sohail (respondent No.8 herein) started making inappropriate advances towards the petitioner. On April 04, 2022, when the petitioner was alone at home, respondent No.8 namely Sohail (brother-in-law) forcibly raped her. The petitioner has narrated the same to her mother-in-law and sister-in-law but they pressured her to remain silent. Fearing further harm, the petitioner did not disclose the abuse, which only led to continued harassment by the accused Sohail (brother-in-law). On May 16, 2023, the petitioner again informed her mother-in-law and sister-in-law about the abuse. Instead of offering help and support to the petitioner, they beat the petitioner and falsely accused her. Thereafter, the parents of the petitioner took the petitioner back to their home. However, after a gap of two months, the petitioner returned to her in-laws’ house to save her marriage but the harassment continued. On August 29, 2023, the accused namely Sohail again raped the petitioner. It was further submitted that all the accused i.e. respondent Nos.5 to 10 allegedly conspired to kill the petitioner and instigated her husband to do so in order to marry someone else. Fearing for her life, the petitioner fled to her parental home in Sakras. However, on 05.09.2023, the petitioner accompanied by her parents went to Safdarjung Hospital in Delhi after hearing about her father-in-law illness where the petitioner encountered her husband namely Mohd. Salim (respondent No.5 herein) where he pronounced Talaq unilaterally in public, pushed the petitioner and threatened her. Subsequently, the petitioner submitted representation to the concerned Police authorities on 22.09.2024 (Annexure P-1), seeking legal action against her husband and in-laws for alleged rape, cruelty and conspiracy to harm her. The petitioner had also appealed to the Kuwait Embassy to prevent her husband’s departure to avoid evasion of legal consequences (copy whereof is annexed as Annexure P-2 with the instant petition). It was further highlighted by the petitioner that despite her complaints, including a legal notice from her husband dated 23.09.2024 (Annexure P-3) and representation to the SHO (Annexure P-4), no action has been taken against the private respondents which necessitated her to approach this Court.

2.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the private respondents in connivance with other persons are threatening the petitioner and her family members. Learned counsel has further iterated that the Section 173(1)