ORDER

1. This petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Cr.P.C.) has been filed by petitioner for quashment of FIR dated 29.9.2022 registered vide crime No. 554 of 2022 at police Station Sector 1 Pithampur District Dhar for offence under sections 376, 376(2)(n) and 506 of Indian Penal Code (In short IPC) and all subsequent proceedings.

2. Brief facts of the case are that on 29.9.2022 prosecutrix lodged an FIR at police station Sector No. 1 Pithampur by stating that she is living separately from her husband since last 15 years alongwith her on and daughter. She has given two rooms to Basubai for rent. The present applicant who happens to be brother of Basubai used to come in the said house. ngagement of her son Kanha was solemnized with applicant's daughter Rani on 15.2.2021. On 20.2.2021 at about 5 pm when prosecutrix was alone in her home, at that time applicant entered into her house and told her that "I shall look after your children" and thereafter he has committed rape upon her and repeated same act on several times by threatening her that if she discloses the incident to anyone then he will kill her. Thereafter she broke up engagement of her son with daughter of applicant. On 28.9.2022 applicant also threatened her for life on mobile phone.

3. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. Prior to the incident, complainant has implicated so many persons in various cases and prosecutrix treated the applicant as husband and she is living since last four months as husband and wife. They have so many photographs with each other. After broke-down the engagement prosecutrix has falsely implicated him. FIR is too much belated without any explanation. This Court has granted anticipatory bail to applicant at earlier stage. Hence he prays that FIR registered against him be quashed.

4. Per contra learned counsel for state has opposed the prayer and prays for its rejection.

5. Nobody has appeared on behalf of respondent No. 2 though duly served.

6. Both the parties heard at length and perused the documents filed by applicant.

7. From perusal of the FIR, it appears that although FIR is belated, but applicant is named in the FIR. It is admitted fact that prosecutrix is a married lady and did not get divorced from her first husband. The applicant has contended that since last four years he is living with prosecurix as husband and wife. It is indirect admission of sexual relationship of applicant with prosecutrix. Although applicant has filed so many photographs with prosecutrix, but it is noteworthy that prosecutrix has performed engagement of her son with daughter of applicant, therefore, looking to the aforesaid relation, their photographs cannot be treated as a proof that prosecutrix has given her consent for sexual relationship with present applicant.

8. The Hon'ble apex Court in the case of Rajeev Kourav v. Baisahab and others reported in (2020) 3 SCC 317 has held as under:-

"It is no more res integra that exercise of power under section 482 CrPC to quash a criminal proceeding is only when an allegation made in the FIR or the charge sheet constitutes the ingredients of the offence/offences alleged. Interference by the High Court under section 482 CrPC is to prevent the abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It is settled law that the evidence produced by the accused in his defence cannot be looked into by the Court, except in very exceptional circumstances, at the initial stage of the criminal proceedings. It is trite law that the High Court cannot embark upon the appreciation of evidence while considering the petition filed under section 482 CrPC for quashing criminal proceedings. It is clear from the law laid down by this Court that if a prima facie case is made out disclosing the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused, the Court cannot quash a criminal proceeding."

9. In case of Chira