Brief Facts
- FIR was filed by the complainant against the appellant on the accusations of rape (Section 376 IPC) and criminal intimidation (Section 506 IPC). Subsequently, the appellant filed a petition before the High Court seeking the quashing of the FIR, which was dismissed.
- The complainant had claimed that the appellant, who was running IIT coaching classes in Delhi, had assured his daughter (the victim) of marriage. But when the marriage proposal was declined by the appellant’s family, the complainant was threatened by the appellant’s relatives. The complaint further asserted that under the victim’s pressure, the appellant got a fraudulent marriage certificate prepared from an Arya Samaj Mandir. The High Court had granted interim relief restraining the police from taking the appellant into custody, with a condition for the appellant to join the investigation.
- It was recorded by the First Investigation Officer that the marriage between the appellant and the victim had happened and the marriage certificate issued by Arya Samaj was genuine, however, the appellant did not fulfil his matrimonial obligations, leading to a petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).
- However, the High Court dismissed the Petition.
Issues
- Whether the FIR for the offence under section 376 of IPC can be sustained if the parties had married each other prior to the lodging of the FIR?
Held
- The Petition was allowed and the FIR was quashed by the Court after concluding that the marriage was solemnized between the Appellant and the Complainant, as the same was even admitted in the legal notice sent by the Counsel of the Complainant to Appellant in which the Complainant was referred as wife of the Appellant
- The Court conclude that the relationship between the appellant and the victim was a consensual relationship which culminated in the marriage. In the legal notice issued on behalf of the appellant, the factum of marriage was admitted. Therefore, on the face of it, the allegation that the physical relationship was maintained due to false promise given by the appellant to marry, is without basis as their relationship led to the solemnization of marriage. Therefore, this is a case where the allegations made in the FIR were such that on the basis of the statements, no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the appellant. Therefore, clause (5) of the decision of this Court in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors., AIR 1992 SC 604 will apply. Hence, a case was made out for quashing the FIR.
Relevant Paras
- 9, 10, 11