HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
*****
Criminal Petition No.4740 OF 2022
Between:
Vikas Kumar ... Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana,
rep. by S.H.O,
Jawahar Nagar Police Staion,
Rep. through Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad and another ... Respondents
DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 15.12.2022
Submitted for approval.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
1 Whether Reporters of Local
newspapers may be allowed to Yes/No
see the Judgments?
2 Whether the copies of judgment
may be marked to Law Yes/No
Reporters/Journals
3 Whether Their
Ladyship/Lordship wish to see Yes/No
the fair copy of the Judgment?
_________________
K.SURENDER, J
2
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER
+ CRL.P. No. 4740 of 2022
% Dated 15.12.2022
# Vikas Kumar ... Petitioner
And
$ The State of Telangana,
rep. by S.H.O,
Jawahar Nagar Police Staion,
Rep. through Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad and another ... Respondents
! Counsel for the Petitioner: Smt. P.Vandana
^ Counsel for the Respondents: Sri S.Sudershan,
Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1
Sri P.Govind Raj for R2.
>HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred
Criminal Appeal No.1217 of 2022, dated 10.08.2022
3
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4740 OF 2022
ORDER:
1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/A2 in PRC No.106 of 2021 dated 29.09.2021 on the file of XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Medchal.
2. According to the defacto complainant, she is a software engineer and in the month of June 2020, she came into contact with the petitioner herein through internet via Bumble and Instagram. They became friends and met for two months. In the month of September 2020, when the petitioner proposed, the 2nd respondent accepted. They visited several hotels and places. By making false promise of marriage and giving hopes about future, the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the defacto complainant. On 25th January 2021 at 10.30 pm, the petitioner forcibly touched her and had sexual intercourse without her consent and at the same time, he promised to join her company in Bangalore and stay with her in a live-in relationship. Though the defacto complainant 4 sent several company referrals, the petitioner ignored and started avoiding the defacto complainant. The petitioner was going out with other women and when questioned, the petitioner threatened the defacto complainant and her family and also threatened to leak private videos.
3. For the reason of avoiding the defacto complainant, she filed complaint on 19.06.2021, which was registered for the offence under Section 376(2)(n), 417 and 493 of IPC. Having concluded investigation, the police filed charge sheet for the said offences.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that both the petitioner and the defacto complainant have compromised the matter and the defacto complainant is not inclined to proceed with the case. The 2nd respondent/defacto complainant filed an affidavit stating as follows:
"3. I submit that the petitioner/Accused and I were in a consensual relationship for a period of 1.2 years and the same had ended on bad terms leading to disputes between me and the petitioner/accused. I submit that the events described in the written complaint I lodged are not reflective of true events. I have lodged the above-said complaint out of anger due to misunderstandings and disputes between me and the petitioner/accused. I further submit that I had faced pressure and stigma from members of my family, relatives, and society. Further, 5 due to certain ill advise and suggestions from lawyers and friends, I have lodged the above-said complaint dated 19.06.2021. I submit that subsequently, the petitioner/Accused and I have settled our disputes and misunderstandings amicably and I wish to withdraw the complaint.
4. I further respectfully submit that I tender my unconditional apology to this Court for wasting the time and resources of the courts as well as the Respondent Authorities. As such, I would like to submit that the same was neither willful nor wanton on my part and is entirely borne out of pressure, stigma faced as a woman and ill advise. As withdrawing the said complaint is not possible, I am filing the present Compromise petition to get the crime against the petitioner/Accused closed. No useful purpose would be served if the matter is kept pending. More so when we wish to withdraw the complaint. As such the proceeding is required to be closed."
5. Both the petitioner and the defacto complainant were present in the Court when hearing had taken place. When enquired, the defacto complainant stated that she was not inclined to prosecute the case and for the said reason, she requested the Court to drop all further proceedings against the petitioner.
6. As seen from the complainant and also Section 161 Cr.P.C statement made, the defacto complainant and the petitioner are both majors and working. Even according to the defacto complainant, she had accompanied the petitioner several times to various places and also had sex consensually, though she states that it was on account of promise of marriage. In the said circumstances when the petitioner and 6 the defacto complainant being adults met and had physical relationship over a period of time, only for the reason of subsequently declining to marry would not amount to an offence of rape. Further, it is no where mentioned in the charge sheet or the complaint that the petitioner deceitfully made the defacto complainant believe of lawful marriage and cohabited with her. When there is no such allegation, the question of attracting offence under Section 493 of IPC does not arise.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment of Kapil Gupta v. State of NCT of Delhi and others [Criminal Appeal No.1217 of 2022, dated 10.08.2022] while dealing with a case of alleged rape and parties intended to put an end to the proceedings, held as follows:
"15. The facts and circumstances as stated hereinabove are peculiar in the present case. Respondent No.2 is a young lady of 23 years. She feels that going through trial in one case, where she is a complainant and in the other case, wherein she is the Accused would rob the prime of her youth. She feels that if she is made to face the trial rather than getting any relief, she would be faced with agony of undergoing the trial.
16. In both the cases, though the charge sheets have been filed, the charges are yet to be framed and as such, the trial has not yet commenced. It is further to be noted that since the Respondent No.2 herself is not supporting the prosecution case, even if the criminal trial is permitted to go ahead, it will end in nothing else than an 7 acquittal. If the request of the parties is denied, it will be amounting to only adding one more criminal case to the already overburdened criminal courts."
8. In the present case, on facts, neither the ingredients of the offence of rape punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC nor the ingredients of section 493 of IPC for cohabiting deceitfully inducing belief of lawful marriage are attracted. It is not the case that there was any deceit played from the inception for which reason, an offence of cheating is not attracted. On facts and also for the reason of parties not being inclined to proceed with the case, no useful purpose would be served to keep the proceedings pending. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, when the trial is likely to end in acquittal and directing to continue such proceedings would only overburden criminal courts.
9. For the aforementioned reasons, the proceedings against the petitioner in PRC No.106 of 2021 on the file of XXIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad are hereby quashed. 8
10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 15.12.2022 Note: LR copy to be marked.
B/o.kvs 9 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No.4740 of 2022 Date: 15.12.2022.
kvs