THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10260 OF 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner – accused seeking to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.1385 of 2022 on the file of the learned Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act at Medchal, registered for the offences under Sections 417 and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC”).

2. Heard the submissions of Sri M.Anand Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 – State.

3. The learned petitioner counsel has submitted that the de facto complainant is an adult and that a false case is booked against the petitioner and that the police have casually included the alleged offences against the petitioner. He further submitted that the de facto complainant is very much conscious with the consequences of her relationship with the petitioner herein and hence, the petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the alleged offences, therefore, prayed to quash the same.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the contents of the complaint and the investigation by the police reveal that the de facto complainant has not consented initially. It further reveals that in the first instance the petitioner has taken the de facto complainant to his friend’s house and after dinner he has given her sprite and after having that she fell unconscious and when she woke up in the morning, he disclosed that when she was unconscious he had sexual intercourse with her and he further promised that he would marry her after one year and asked her not to disclose the said affair. Thus, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the truth can be actually brought out during the course of trial and hence, prayed to dismiss the said petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The record reveals that SC No.1385 of 2022 is pending before the learned Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act at Medchal for the offences under Sections 417, 376(2)(n) of IPC.

7. The learned petitioner counsel has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in Amol Bhagwan Nehul v. The State of Maharashtra, SLP (Crl.) No.10044 of 2024, wherein, relying upon the principles laid down by the State of Haryana and others v. Bhajanlal and others, 1992 Supp(1) Supreme Court Cases 335 the Apex Court has quashed the proceedings against the petitioner. In the said case, the de facto complainant and the petitioner were acquainted and they interacted frequently and fell in love with each other and they were engaged in a physical relationship and subsequently, the complainant has alleged that the appellant had done so without her consent. But in the present case, the initial incident is alleged to have happened without the consent of the de facto complainant as narrated in the complaint. Therefore, the facts of the cited decision differ with those in the case on hand. Hence, the same is not applicable.

8. The contents of the complaint do point out that the de facto complainant has not consented for the physical relationship with the petitioner in the first instance. The course of events, the testimony of the witnesses with regard to the allegations would be tested during the course of trial. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings at this stage.

9. In the result, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the learned Fast Track Special Court for Expeditious Trial and Disposal of Rape and POCSO Act at Medchal, to dispose of S.C.No.1385 of 2022 at the earliest, strictly in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court. However, the attendance of the petitioner is dispensed with before the trial Court, unless his presence is specifically required by the trial Court during the course of trial, provided that he shall be represented by his counsel on eve