LI Network
Published on: 03 September 2023 at 16:37 IST
The Allahabad High Court, utilizing Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), has dismissed rape proceedings against the Applicant, reaffirming that the “Judicial process should not be instrumental or oppressive for needless harassment.”
The Court granted an application under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the entire proceedings based on a charge sheet and the cognizance order issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) in a case registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The Court emphasized that the allegations against the Applicant appear to be untrue, fabricated, and malicious in intent.
Justice Sameer Jain noted, “Therefore, from the discussion made above, it appears that from the face of it the allegations made against the applicant appear to be false, concocted and fabricated one and no prima facie offence of rape and threatening against the applicant is made out…
The law is settled that the judicial process should not be instrumental or oppressive for needless harassment, and if this Court finds that proceeding pending against the accused is abuse of the process of law and it has been instituted with mala fide intention or ulterior motive with a view for wrecking vengeance, then this Court should exercise the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and should quash the proceedings pending against the accused to prevent an abuse of the process of Court and to secure the ends of justice.”
The Applicant’s sister-in-law (the Informant) filed an FIR under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC. She alleged that after her husband’s death, the Applicant attempted to establish a physical relationship with her. Due to these attempts and her family’s behavior towards her, she returned to her paternal home.
The Informant claimed that one morning, the Applicant came to her paternal home and proposed to her. Later, he induced her to inhale a substance and then raped her. When the Informant regained consciousness, she saw that the Applicant had raped her and was asleep on the same bed. When she threatened to report the incident, the Applicant blackmailed her, threatening to release a video of the rape on social media.
The Applicant allegedly raped her again, threatening to release the video. The Informant also alleged that the Applicant had promised to marry her but later refused to do so. However, during the investigation, no video evidence of the alleged rape was found, and the Informant contended that the Applicant had created videos but subsequently deleted them.
An application under Section 482 of the CrPC was filed, seeking to quash the proceedings based on the charge sheet and the CJM’s cognizance order in the case registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC.
The Court relied on Supreme Court rulings in the cases of Kapil Agarwal and others v Sanjay Sharma and others [(2021), Prabhatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v State of Gujarat and another ((2017), M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v State of Maharashtra and others AIR (2021), and State of Haryana and others v Bhajan Lal and other (1992) .
The Court reiterated that under Section 482 of the CrPC, the Court cannot thwart a legitimate prosecution at its inception, and the inherent power should be used sparingly and with great caution. However, if it appears that even if all allegations are accepted, no offense is established, or the proceedings have been initiated solely with the intent to harass the accused, then the Court can invoke its jurisdiction to quash the proceedings in the interest of justice and to achieve justice.
Consequently, the Court granted the Application and quashed the challenged proceedings and charge sheet.
