Delhi High Court: In a petition filed by the petitioners seeking to quash the FIR registered for offences under Sections 3761/377/3232/3133/5064/5095/346 of Penal Code, 1860, Girish Kathpalia, J., stated that it was not satisfied that the impugned FIR and/or the consequent proceedings could presently be treated as abuse of process of the court in any manner or that quashing the same would secure the ends of justice. On the contrary, if the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix, led to the registration of FIR and the consequent proceedings was not truthful, quashing the same would be tantamount to encouraging the abuse of process of criminal justice machinery.
Therefore, the Court stated that it was not the fit case to quash the registered FIR and accordingly, dismissed the present petition.
Background
The prosecutrix was married with one ‘X’ on 17-4-2011 and was blessed with two children. When she came to her parental home for temporary stay, her neighbour i.e., the accused started following her. The accused would start crying and would say that he would die without her, as he was in love with her. Gradually, she developed sympathy for him.
In January 2022, the accused called her at his home under the pretext of introducing her with his family members. Once she reached there, the accused established physical relations with her against her consent and clicked her nude photographs and videos. The accused claimed his right over her and threatened her to get married with him. Thereafter, the accused repeatedly took her to some hotel and indulged in unnatural sex with her against her consent.
After some time, when prosecutrix along with her family visited Kashmir, the accused also reached there and established physical relations with her. When she got pregnant, the accused got her pregnancy aborted. The accused also told her to flee from her matrimonial home after taking away whatever cash amount was possible. So, she reached the said hotel, where the accused took from her an amount of Rs.1,10,000 on the pretext of getting married with her. But after establishing relations with her in the hotel, he left her there and did not return for two days despite her repeated phone calls.
The prosecutrix alleged that she was repeatedly raped under force and threats by Petitioner 1 (‘accused’), beaten up and forced to participate in unnatural sex and forced to carry out abortion under the threat of circulating her nude photographs and videos on social media.
The present petition was filed claiming that the continuance of trial proceedings was abuse of process and quashing of the proceedings was called to secure the ends of justice. Claim of the present petitioners was that since the accused was now married with the prosecutrix, quashing the FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom would secure ends of justice.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court stated that it was nobody’s case that the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix contained false allegations. If that was so, why should the prosecutrix be allowed to get away with lodging false complaint that led to initiation of criminal justice machinery. The Court stated that every false complaint contributes to not just unnecessary load on the overflowing dockets, but also to the artefacts of crime, generating an impression in the society about falsity even of genuine complaints, thereby causing grave injustice to actual rape victims. Quashing the criminal proceedings in such situations would be tantamount to the High Court giving seal of approval to such abuse of process of criminal justice machinery by the complainant.
Further, the Court stated that on the other hand, if the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix contained truth, would it be justified to push her into the matrimonial fold of her tormentor, thereby granting premium to the rapist. Should it not be the bounden duty of the State to ensure food, clothing and shelter to such victim, so that she does not helplessly surrender into the matrimony offered by her rapist to escape clutches of law.
The Court stated that it was not satisfied that the impugned FIR and/or the consequent proceedings could presently be treated as abuse of process of the court in any manner or that quashing the same would secure the ends of justice. On the contrary, if the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix, led to the registration of FIR and the consequent proceedings was not truthful, quashing the same would be tantamount to encouraging the abuse of process of criminal justice machinery. The trend gradually setting in across the society to lodge false complaints with impunity and thereafter retract, needs to be checked.
However, if the complaint lodged by the prosecutrix, which led to registration of FIR and the consequent proceedings was truthful, instead of extending premium to a rapist and a molester by pushing the helpless rape victim into his matrimony, it would be the duty of the State to ensure her a dignified life by providing her food, shelter and clothing.
Therefore, the Court stated that it was not the fit case to quash the registered FIR and accordingly, dismissed the present petition.
[X v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2025 SCC OnLine Del 2796, decided on 29-4-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioners: Imran Ali and Aanchal, Advocates.
For the Respondents: Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC with IO/SI Sharanya. S, PS Jamia Nagar; Fakre Alam, Advocate
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
1. Section 64 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’)
