Back
Rape Allegations Used For Settlement In Marital Disputes:
The has expressed grave concern over a growing pattern in , where complainants are increasingly weaponizing serious to extract from in-laws. Justice Girish Kathpalia, while presiding over a case involving FIR No. 239/2024, stayed proceedings, noting that the invocation of grave charges like rape appears to be a rather than a genuine pursuit of justice.
A Familiar Yet Distressing Pattern The case centers on a petition filed by two brothers-in-law of a complainant who had accused them of severe offences, including rape () and molestation (). The petitioners submitted that their family relationship with the complainant—who married the petitioners' brother in —soured only after a divorce petition was filed by the husband in . Curiously, the allegation of rape surfaced only in , during a under , alleging an incident dating back to .
The Shadow of 'Arnesh Kumar' The Court observed that this strategy appears to have surfaced in the wake of the ’s in . By narrowing the scope for in cases under (cruelty and breach of trust), the ruling sought to prevent the . However, Justice Kathpalia noted that the has birthed a new, dangerous trend: to bypass these restrictions, complainants are now tacking on , to ensure the arrest or pressure of the accused party.
Key Observations from the Bench Justice Kathpalia highlighted the systematic nature of these allegations:
"A trend is setting in where the complainants have started alleging such serious charges of rape, molestation and similar other sexual misconduct only to ensure that the in-laws of the complainant are compelled to settle the by paying hefty amounts."
The Court further noted:
"I also find substance in the submission of learned Senior Counsel for petitioners that in the recent past, ever since the delivered the judgment in the case of & Anr ... a trend is setting in where the complainants have started alleging such serious charges... only to ensure that the in-laws are compelled to settle."
The Road Ahead The High Court has issued through the , with a of . Pending further deliberation, the proceedings have been frozen to prevent the potential .
The has been ordered to file a detailed one week prior to the next hearing. This order serves as a stern reminder to both the legal community and the public that the sanctity of the must not be sacrificed in the heat of a . Whether this case will lead to a broader on curbing the misuse of sexual assault provisions in remains to be seen.
