IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA th ON THE 9 OF JULY, 2024 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1888 of 2024 MAHESHCHANDRA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH …........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Appearance:

Shri Vivek Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Tarun Kushwah, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State.

Shri Akashdeep Shukla, learned counsel for the objector.

…........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

ORDER

1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties the matter is finally heard.

2. This Criminal Revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner/accused for setting aside the order dated 02.02.2024 passed in Sessions Trial No.142/2023 Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ whereby charges have been framed by the 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Special Judge (OAW), Indore under Section 377, 498-A, 506 Part-II of the IPC.

3. As per the prosecution, on 13.10.2022 a report was lodged by the prosecutrix before Police Station Heera Nagar, District Indore Urban against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 376, 377, 506, 498-A of the IPC. She stated that her husband, the petitioner, has instituted a case against her for dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce before Family Court, Indore. In August, 2021 she denied to give divorce to the petitioner upon which he started harassing her. She refused to have any physical relationship with him but he develops such relation with her forcefully and in a wrong manner and abuses her. On 13.10.2022 at about 8.00 a.m. he committed rape upon her and also performed unnatural sex upon her. He also performed oral sex upon her forcefully. She is fed up with the acts of the petitioner, who also says that if she narrates the incident to any one he would kill her.

4. Upon lodging of the report by the prosecutrix investigation was commenced by the Police during the course of which statements of the prosecutrix and other witnesses were recorded and various documents were collected. After completion of the investigation chargesheet was filed by the Police before the Court concerned and the charges as aforesaid have been framed against the petitioner.

5. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner for quashment of the charges framed against him as aforesaid. However during course of hearing learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is Signature Not Verified Signed by: NEERAJ confining this petition to the charge framed against the petitioner under Section 377 of the IPC. It is submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated by the prosecutrix. There is no prima facie case against him even as per the allegations of the FIR. The prosecutrix has mischievously given criminal colour to a civil dispute which is essentially a matrimonial dispute. The prosecutrix has lodged the complaint only as a pressure tactic against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the legally wedded husband of the prosecutrix hence between them offence under Section 377 of the IPC would not at all be attracted. It is hence submitted that the charge framed against the petitioner under Section 377 of the IPC deserves to be quashed.

6. Reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the decision of this Court in Umang Singhar V/s. State of M.P. and Another, M.Cr.C. No.59600/2022 decided on 21.09.2023, Megha Shende V/s. State of M.P. and Another, M.Cr.C. N.2436/201