Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashed The FIR In A Rape Case Considering It Maliciously Instituted With An Ulterior Motive

Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashed The FIR In A Rape Case Considering It Maliciously Instituted With An Ulterior Motive

Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashed The FIR In A Rape Case Considering It Maliciously Instituted With An Ulterior Motive

The High Court of Madhya Pradesh allowed the writ petition filed by one rape accused praying for the quashing of FIR. Hon’ble Court has found that there wasn’t any false promise for marriage and considered that the FIR has been lodged with some malafide intention due to some relationship issue or for some other ulterior motives.

 

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE

The complainant has made the written complaint alleging the forcible rape committed on her by the petitioner. In a complaint she has informed the Police that Petitioner used to give death threats to her so that she would make physical relationship with him. It was stated in a complaint that both were in physical relationship for the last four years and when the complainant has made the request for the marriage then the Petitioner not only refused her request but also physically assaulted to her.

CONTENTION OF PETITIONER

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner firstly drawn attention of the court towards delay in lodging of FIR. He submitted that the alleged incident took place 4 years back and FIR has been registered on 6.10.2022. While making counter allegation on respondent learned counsel stated that the complainant-respondent is a habitual blackmailer and in the year 2013 and 2019, she had accused two more men also lodged the FIR against them. Further he relied on the judgement of Manoranjan Goshwami Vs. State Of Maharashtra reported in (2020) SCC online SC 964 and prayed for the quashing of FIR.

CONTENTION OF THE RESPONDENT

Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in the reply filed by respondent no.1 and respondent no.2 it was stated that the essential elements for constituting the offence of rape u/s 376 of the IPC has been found in the complainant. Further it was submitted that petitioner was not in a situation to defend himself according to the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in case of State of Haryana and Others Vs. Bhajanlal and Others and also as per the statement of complainant and witnesses recorded it seems that prima facie the offence has been made out against the petitioner.

HON’BLE COURT OBSERVATIONS

Hon’ble Court after perusal of evidences on record and the statements made by both the parties essentially observed that,

“It appears that petitioner was known to prosecutrix for last four years and they were having physical relationship with each other. It has not been stated in written complaint that petitioner promised to marry her and thereafter he committed sexual intercourse with her. It was also not stated that he gave promise to marry the prosecutrix and thereafter established physical relationship with her. It was only stated that he took her to a house to talk to her regarding their friendship and has raped her. No complaint was made at that time and thereafter many times both of them established physical relationship. It has not been stated that during these time any promise of marriage was given to prosecutrix.”

Further the bench of Hon’ble Justice Vishal Dhagat in its order has mentioned the observations made by Apex Court in State of Haryana and Others Vs. Bhajanlal and Others regarding the categories of cases when court can exercise its constitutional power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.PC and held that the present case falls under the category,

“Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”

Hence, considering all the facts and circumstances of the case Hon’ble Court has allowed the writ petition and quashed the FIR against the Petitioner.

 

  • CASE TITLE: MOHD. FAHEEM KHAN Vs  STATE OF MADHYA    PRADESH AND OTHERS.
  • ORDER DATE: 15.06.2023

 

Related post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *