The Delhi High Court has quashed an First Information Report (FIR) registered against a man upon allegations of raping a woman at multiple occasions on false promise of marriage, while noting that the process of the law is being used as a tool for settling personal scores.
The Court of Justice Subramonium Prasad was dealing with a plea moved by a man seeking quashing of an FIR registered against him at PS-Tilak Nagar in March last year, for offences punishable under Sections 376(2), 354 and 354A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
At the outset, in October 2020, the woman made a complaint against the petitioner stating that they were in a relationship for three years, but the petitioner concealed from her that he was a divorcee. It was further stated that the petitioner had promised to marry her while he was in a relationship with someone else and had also abused and assaulted her. The said complaint was, however, withdrawn by him the next day stating that there was a misunderstanding between them which was later resolved.
Another complaint was lodged by her in February 2021, stating that she met the petitioner through Facebook and after 3-4 months of chatting, the petitioner started visiting her house. It was further stated that in August 2017, when her mother had gone out of town, the petitioner came to her house and committed rape upon her after administering a stupefying drink to her. Thereafter, the petitioner forcibly established sexual relationships with her on several occasions by blackmailing her that he would make their intercourse video viral. It was also alleged in the complaint that his family members outraged her modesty and threatened her with dire consequences when she went to his house to settle the issue of marriage.
Also Read: Allahabad High Court disposes of plea regarding unlawful construction in Kanpur
Based on the said complaint, an FIR was registered against the petitioner and his family members.
Senior Advocate K.K. Manan, representing the petitioner, argued that the petitioner was being falsely implicated in the case on account of the four-year long relationship between him and the complainant turning sour.
Relying on several Apex Court rulings, he submitted that the petitioner had not made any false promise of marriage to the complainant and that there is a difference between false promise to marry and breach of promise with the difference being that in false promise to marry one has, to induce the complainant from the inception only for engaging in sexual relations with her without any intention to marry her at all whereas breach of promise would be when a person had the intention of keeping the promise at the time of establishing sexual relations.
Also Read: HP High Court directs Bilaspur DC to consider plea regarding removal of blockages on road
The Court observed that-
“the prosecutrix was in a long-term relationship spanning a period of four years and the FIR was only filed after the said relationship ended on hostile terms. Therefore, it cannot be said that the consent so accorded for establishment of physical relationship was predicated upon misconception of fear.”
“There are notable discrepancies in each of the successive complaints of the petitioner, that make it seem that a private dispute is being aggravated for ulterior purposes and the process of the law is being used as a tool for settling personal scores,”
added the Court while opining that the instant case is fit for exercise of inherent power by the Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and quashed the FIR.