Ravinder Kumar vs The State
2020 Latest Caselaw 3398 Del

$~19
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                                  Date of decision: 14.12.2020
+      BAIL APPLN. 3997/2020
       RAVINDER KUMAR                                       ..... Petitioner
                          Through:      Mr. Siddhartha Singh, Adv.

                          versus

       THE STATE                                          ..... Respondent
                          Through:      Mr. Amit Chadha, APP for State
                                        W/SI Saroj Bala, PS Jahangir Puri
                                        with complainant in person


       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT

                          J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

Crl. M.A. 17284 /2020 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application is disposed of.

BAIL APPLN. 3997/2020

3. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks directions thereby to

grant anticipatory bail or protection from arrest in favour of the petitioner in

FIR No. 539/2020 dated 27.10.2020 lodged in Police Station Jahangir Puri,

District-North, Delhi under Section 376/ 506 IPC.

4. Notice issued.

5. Learned APP for State accepts notice.

6. Prosecutrix is personally present in court through VC with W/SI Saroj

Bala, IO of the case, she states that due to misunderstanding, she made false

allegations of rape which culminated into the present FIR and she seeks

unconditional apology from this Court and submits that she does not want to

pursue this case, thus, FIR may be quashed

7. Although, as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Parbat Bhai Aahir and Ors. vs. State of Gujrat & Ors.: (AIR 2017 SC

4843), the FIR should not be quashed in case of a heinous offence, but when

the respondent No.2/complainant herself takes the initiative and makes

affidavits before this Court, stating that she made the complaint due to some

misunderstanding and now wants to give quietus to the misunderstanding

which arose between the petitioner and respondent no.2, in my considered

opinion, in such cases, there will be no purpose in continuing with the trial.

Ultimately, if such direction is issued, the result will be of acquittal in favour

of the accused, but substantial public time shall be wasted.

8. This Court is conscious about the dictum of the Supreme Court in

terms of seriousness of the case, however, keeping in view the fact that they

remained friends for two years and are also relatives and had consensual

physical relations with each other. Thereafter, they had a break up in the

month of February, 2020 and the present FIR is registered on 27.10.2020.

9. Keeping in view the statement made by prosecutrix and the aforesaid

fact though the present petition is filed for anticipatory bail, however, while

exercising power under Section 482, Cr.P.C., I hereby convert the present

petition for quashing of FIR as no useful purpose would be served in

prosecuting petitioner any further.

10. For the reasons afore-recorded, FIR No. 539/2020 dated 27.10.2020

registered at Police Station Jahangir Puri and consequent proceedings

emanating therefrom are quashed.

11. The petition is, accordingly, allowed and disposed of.

12. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

(SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE DECEMBER 14, 2020/ms