The Himachal Pradesh High Court allowed a petition, filed for quashing the FIR registered against the petitioner. The Court observed that where the separated wife alleged that she was made to undergo sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage, no offense is made out, as she could not have married without divorcing her husband.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner had proposed to marry the informant. The informant said that she was already married and could not marry. The petitioner continued to talk to the informant. He took her to a hotel where he entered into sexual relations with the informant on the assurance of the marriage. He asked her to divorce her husband and marry him. The informant and her husband filed a divorce petition on 30.05.2019 and the same was decided on 04.12.2019.
The informant contacted the petitioner; however, he changed his mobile phone. He told her that he wanted to use her and never intended to marry her. The police registered the F.I.R. and conducted the investigation. The police found that the petitioner never intended to marry the informant as she belonged to a different caste. The petitioner has approached this Court to quash the F.I.R. It has been asserted that the informant filed the complaint against the petitioner to extract money from him.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that as per the contents of the F.I.R., the informant was married and could not have been deceived by the promise to marry her because she knew that it was not permissible for her to marry the petitioner during the subsistence of an existing marriage. Hence, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and F.I.R. be quashed.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the informant had specifically stated that she was raped on the assurance of the marriage. The petitioner never intended to marry her as is apparent from the fact that he declined to marry the informant after she had obtained a divorce from her husband; therefore, he prayed that the present petition be dismissed.
Observations of the Court:
The Court noted that power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can be exercised to prevent the abuse of process or secure the ends of justice. The Court can quash the F.I.R. if the allegations do not constitute an offense or make out a case against the accused.
The Court observed that where the separated wife alleged that she was made to undergo sexual intercourse on the promise of marriage, no offense is made out, as she could not have married without divorcing her husband. The Court said that in the absence of any evidence that rape was committed on a victim because she was a member of the scheduled caste, the offense punishable under Section 3 (2) (v) (a) of SC&ST, (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is not made out. The issue of whether the offense was committed against a person on the ground that such person is a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is to be established by the prosecution.
The decision of the Court:
The Himachal Pradesh High Court, allowing the petition, held that the F.I.R. and the investigation conducted thereafter do not disclose the commission of a cognizable offense against the petitioner.
Case Title: Gulshan Kumar v State of H.P. & Anr.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Rakesh Kainthala
Case no.: Cr. MMO No. 498 of 2021
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Hitesh Chopra
Advocate for the Respondents: Mr. Prashant Sen
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :