SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Telangana) 622

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SURENDER, J.
Vikas Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana, rep. by S.H.O, Jawahar Nagar Police Staion and another - Respondents
Criminal Petition No.4740 Of 2022
Decided On : 15-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Smt. P. Vandana
For the Respondents: Sri S. Sudershan, Sri P. Govind Raj.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376(2)(n), 417, 493 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 161 – Offence of rape – Cheating – Cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful marriage – Held, on facts, neither ingredients of offence of rape punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC nor ingredients of section 493 of IPC for cohabiting deceitfully inducing belief of lawful marriage are attracted – It is not case that there was any deceit played from inception for which reason, an offence of cheating is not attracted – On facts and also for reason of parties not being inclined to proceed with case, no useful purpose would be served to keep proceedings pending – As observed by Hon’ble Supreme Court, when trial is likely to end in acquittal and directing to continue such proceedings would only overburden criminal courts – Criminal Petition allowed.

ORDER :

1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/A2 in PRC No.106 of 2021 dated 29.09.2021 on the file of XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal.

2. According to the defacto complainant, she is a software engineer and in the month of June 2020, she came into contact with the petitioner herein through internet via Bumble and Instagram. They became friends and met for two months. In the month of September 2020, when the petitioner proposed, the 2nd respondent accepted. They visited several hotels and places. By making false promise of marriage and giving hopes about future, the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the defacto complainant. On 25th January 2021 at 10.30 pm, the petitioner forcibly touched her and had sexual intercourse without her consent and at the same time, he promised to join her company in Bangalore and stay with her in a live-in relationship. Though the defacto complainant sent several company referrals, the petitioner ignored and started avoiding the defacto complainant. The petitioner was going out with other women and when questioned, the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant and her family and also threatened to leak private videos.

3. For the reason of avoiding the defacto complainant, she filed complaint on 19.06.2021, which was registered for the offence under Section 376(2)(n), 417 and 493 of IPC. Having concluded investigation, the police filed charge sheet for the said offences.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that both the petitioner and the defacto complainant have compromised the matter and the defacto complainant is not inclined to proceed with the case. The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant filed an affidavit stating as follows:

    “3. I submit that the petitioner/Accused and I were in a consensual relationship for a period of 1.2 years and the same had ended on bad terms leading to disputes between me and the petitioner/accused. I submit that the events described in the written complaint I lodged are not reflective of true events. I have lodged the above-said complaint out of anger due to misunderstandings and disputes between me and the petitioner/accused. I further submit that I had faced pressure and stigma from members of my family, relatives, and society. Further, due to certain ill advise and suggestions from lawyers and friends, I have lodged the above-said complaint dated 19.06.2021. I submit that subsequently, the petitioner/Accused and I have settled our disputes and misunderstandings amicably and I wish to withdraw the complaint.

4. I further respectfully submit that I tender my unconditional apology to this Court for wasting the time and resources of the courts as well as the Respondent Authorities. As such, I would like to submit that the same was neither willful nor wanton on my part and is entirely borne out of pressure, stigma faced as a woman and ill advise. As withdrawing the said complaint is not possible, I am filing the present Compromise petition to get the crime against the petitioner/Accused closed. No useful purpose would be served if the matter is kept pending. More so when we wish to withdraw the complaint. As such the proceeding is required to be closed.”

5. Both the petitioner and the defacto complainant were present in the Court when hearing had taken place. When enquired, the defacto complainant stated that she was not inclined to prosecute the case and for the said reason, she requested the Court to drop all further proceedings against the petitioner.

6. As seen from the complainant and also Section 161 Cr.P.C statement made, the defacto complainant and the petitioner are both majors and working. Even according to the defacto complainant, she had accompanied the petitioner several times to various places and also had sex consensually, though she states that it was on account of promise of marriage. In the said circumstances when the petitioner and the defacto complainant being adul

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top