Criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC may be quashed if they are filed with mala fide intent as a retaliatory counterblast, are based on inherently improbable allegations lacking corroboration, or result from a tainted investigation, to prevent abuse of the process of law.

ORDER :

MILIND RAMESH PHADKE, J.

By invoking inherent powers of this Court, the present petition has been preferred by petitioner under Section 482 of CrPC seeking quashment of an F.I.R. bearing Crime No.93/2023 registered at Police Station Sirol, District Gwalior for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 506, 341, 384 of IPC as well as all consequential criminal proceedings initiated therefrom.

2. As per prosecution story, the complainant/prosecutrix, aged about 47 years, along with her sister, approached the police station and submitted a written complaint to the effect that her husband is working as an Assistant Professor in KRG College, Gwalior, where one Harshita Kushwaha (Rajawat) is a student. It was alleged that on 08 August 2022, at about 9:00 p.m., Harshita Kushwaha made a telephonic call to the mobile phone of the husband of the prosecutrix, and both were allegedly engaged in conversation. When the prosecutrix inquired about the call, her husband informed her that he was speaking with Harshita, which led to a heated exchange between the spouses. On the following morning, at about 10:00 a.m., the prosecutrix went to the house of her sister situated at D.D. Nagar. From there, she allegedly used the mobile phone of Harshita’s father to contact him and informed him about the aforesaid situation. It was further alleged that Harshita’s father, Gurusharan Singh (the accused), informed the prosecutrix that the matter could not be discussed over the phone and asked her to meet him near the A.G. Pull area at around 8:00 p.m. Thereafter, at about 8:30 p.m., the prosecutrix reached near the Enat of AG Pull, where the accused Gurusharan Singh was present in his four-wheeler vehicle. The prosecutrix allegedly sat inside the vehicle, whereupon the accused demanded a sum of Rs.20 lakhs within five days, threatening that otherwise a false case of rape would be registered at the instance of his daughter against the husband of the prosecutrix. When the prosecutrix expressed her inability to arrange such a large amount and stated that she could arrange only Rs.1 lakh, the accused allegedly asked her to sit on the rear seat of the vehicle under the pretext of arranging a meeting with Harshita. Thereafter the accused drove the vehicle towards Alapur Road, Sirol, stopped it near shrubs at a secluded place, took out a knife, and forcibly committed rape upon the prosecutrix. After the incident, the accused allegedly dropped the prosecutrix near the Collectorate area and threatened her that if she disclosed the incident to anyone, a false rape case would be lodged against her husband by his daughter Harshita. It was further alleged that due to fear and shame, the prosecutrix did not disclose the incident to anyone and returned to her home. Subsequently, the accused allegedly attempted to approach the prosecutrix on several occasions when she went to school and market, with intention of maintaining physical relations with her. On 5 April 2023 at about 4:00 p.m., Harshita Kushwaha came to the house of the prosecutrix and inquired whether the demanded amount of Rs.20 lakhs had been arranged, reiterating the threat that a false rape case would otherwise be lodged against the husband of the prosecutrix. Thereafter, Harshita Kushwaha left the house. On the basis such allegations, the present FIR was registered.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present petition has been filed seeking quashment of FIR registered as Crime No. 93/2023 along with all consequential proceedings, as the same are manifestly illegal, malicious, and constitute a gross abuse of the process of law and even if the allegations made in the FIR and the prosecution story are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, no offence as alleged is made out against the petitioner. The allegations are inherently improbable, self-contradictory, and do not satisfy the essential ingredients of the offences alleged. The FIR is based on conjectures and af