Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Vijayvargiya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 12 May, 2023
Author: Deepak Kumar Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL
ON THE 12 th OF MAY, 2023
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 15127 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SUNIL VIJAYVARGIYA S/O LATE SHRI OM PRAKASH
GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NEAR
MAHARUDRA MANDAL SCHOOL GARBE KI GGOTH
POLICE STATION MADHOGANJ, DISTRICT GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI RAJMANI BANSAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH INCHARGE
POLICE STATION THROUGH POLICE STATION
MADHOGANJ LASHKAR, DISTRICT GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. PROSECUTRIX OF CRIME NO. 10/2023
REGISTERED AT POLICE STATION MADHOGANJ
DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI APS TOMAR- LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.1-
STATE)
This petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
following:
ORDER
The present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the
applicant seeking quashment of charge sheet and other consequential
proceedings arising out FIR vide Crime No.10 of 2023 preregister at Police
Station Madhoganj District Gwalior (M.P.) for offence punishable under
Sections 376, 506 of IPC.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 5/12/2023
5:37:19 PM
2. Allegation against petitioner is that prosecutrix (X) a married lady aged
around 39 years, lodged an FIR at Police Station Madhoganj, District Gwalior
on 07-01-2023 at around 02:07 pm alleging therein that on 03-12-2022 at around
11:00 am her landlord Sunil Vijaywargiya (herein petitioner) entered in her room
while she was alone and forcibly committed sexual intercourse with her and also
gave a threat to her daughter Jyoti Lalwani about her life if she lodges any report
at police station and again he made an attempt to do physical relationship with
her on 07-01-2023 at around 11:30 pm and gave a threat to her daughter about
her life. On the basis of which, aforesaid Crime has been registered for offence
under Sections 376, 506 of IPC. After recording statement of prosecutrix as
well as after completion of investigation and other formalities, charge sheet has
been filed.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR has
been lodged after expiry of approximately 34 days on 07-01-2023 while alleged
incident took place on 03-12-2022 and the distance of police station from house
of prosecutrix (X) is only 500 meters and no explanation in this regard has been
given which creates allegation of prosecutrix (X) unbelievable and unnatural. In
her statement recorded under Section 164 of CrPC, the prosecutrix has not
stated anything about commission of rape with her by the petitioner. Therefore,
the impugned FIR is nothing but is a process of harassment by taking undue
advantage by prosecutrix (X). It is further submitted that there is a dispute
regarding non-payment of rent by the prosecutrix of the house owned by the
mother of the petitioner and in this regard before lodging the FIR a complaint
dated 03-01-2023 vide Annexure A-3 was submitted before the SHO for
eviction of prosecutrix from the house and another application- complaint was
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 5/12/2023
5:37:19 PM
also submitted by mother of petitioner on 05-01-2023 addressing to SP,Gwalior
vide Annexure A-4 stating therein that prosecutrix is committing a nuisance in
the rented house with regard to water, toilet cleaning and electricity supply etc.
The mother of the petitioner is a senior citizen and old lady aged around 80
years suffering from various mental ailments. Further, another application dated
07-01-2023 vide Annexure A-5 was submitted by mother of petitioner against
the prosecutrix and her daughter regarding hurled abuses his mother and
committed marpeet. When the aforesaid facts came to the knowledge of
prosecutrix, she has falsely lodged an FIR alleging commission of rape and
threat. After registration of impugned FIR, the prosecutrix committed marpeet
and abused the mother of petitioner for which an FIR has been lodged vide
Crime No.27 of 2023 on 22-01-2023. It is further contended that even though
continuously three applications filed by mother of petitioner against prosecutrix
(X) before the police officials prior to registration of impugned FIR but the IO
without conducting the investigation fairly as well as squarely and without taking
note of aforesaid applications- has filed charge against petitioner. Therefore,
the impugned FIR is nothing but completely abuse of process of law and the
entire charge sheet does not disclose any offence of rape, particularly in view of
conduct of the prosecutrix (X) but despite of that, the police has wrongly filed
charge sheet before competent Court. The counsel for the applicant in support
of his contention, has relied upon the judgments passed by the Supreme Court
in the cases of State of Haryana vs. Ch. Bhajanlal AIR 1992 SC 604 and it
is further submitted that this Court in the case of Ashish Shukla vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh and Another decided on 26th of April, 2023 in MCRC
15667 of 2023 has also quashed criminal proceedings of same nature of
offence considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in regard to ''
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 5/12/2023
5:37:19 PM
consent'' and ''misconception of fact''.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the submission so
advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner by submitting that at this stage
no interference is warranted as charge sheet has been filed. Hence, prayed for
dismissal of this petition.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sunder Babu vs. State
of T.N., (2009) 14 SCC 244, has given a finding in regard to abuse of process
of law and allegations by referring to judgment of Bhajan Lal and held that
petition under Section 482 deserves to be allowed and the proceedings deserve
to be quashed. After considering earlier several judgments of Bhajan lal (supra)
and Vineet Kumar (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down as under:-
“41. Inherent power given to the High Court under Section
482 CrPC is with the purpose and object of advancement of justice. In
case solemn process of Court is sought to be abused by a person with
some oblique motive, the Court has to thwart the attempt at the very
threshold. The Court cannot permit a prosecution to go on if the case falls
in one of the categories as illustratively enumerated by this Court in State
of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal. Judicial process is a solemn proceeding which
cannot be allowed to be converted into an instrument of operation or
harassment. When there are materials to indicate that a criminal proceeding
is manifestly attended with mala fide and proceeding is maliciously
instituted with an ulterior motive, the High Court will not hesitate in
exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the
proceeding under Category 7 as enumerated in State of Haryana v. Bhajan
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 5/12/2023
5:37:19 PM
Lal, which is to the following effect:
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with
mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with
an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a
view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.†Above
Category 7 is clearly attracted in the facts of the present case.
Although, the High Court has noted the judgment of State of Haryana
v. Bhajan Lal, but did not advert to the relevant facts of the present
case, materials on which final report was submitted by the IO. We,
thus, are fully satisfied that the present is a fit case where the High
Court ought to have exercised its jurisdiction under Section
482 CrPC and quashed the criminal proceedings.â€
7. From the plain reading of FIR allegations as well as statements made
made by prosecutrix (X) in 164 of Cr.P.C., it is clear that impugned FIR is
nothing but is a process of harassment by taking undue advantage by her and
the same has been lodged by her after three applications filed by mother of
petitioner against her before the police officials regarding non-payment of house
rent and creation of nuisance in the rented house owned by mother of the
petitioner. The FIR has been lodged after expiry of approximately 34 days on
07-01-2023 while the alleged incident took place on 03-12-2022 and the distance
of police station from house of prosecutrix (X) is only 500 meters and no
explanation in this regard has been given which creates allegation of prosecutrix
(X) unbelievable and unnatural. After a perusal of copy of FIR and evidence on
record the case set up by prosecutrix (X) seems to be highly unrealistic and
unbelievable. Therefore, the impugned FIR is nothing but is a process of
harassment by taking undue advantage by prosecutrix (X). The proceeding is
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 5/12/2023
5:37:19 PM
maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive by prosecutrix against the
petitioner. Under these circumstances, the prosecution of the petitioner for
offence under Sections 376, 506 of IPC would be nothing but abuse of process
of law and, therefore, no case is made out warranting prosecution of petitioner
regarding commission of aforesaid offences. As a consequence thereof, the
charge sheet as well as other consequential proceedings arising out FIR vide
Crime No.10 of 2023 preregister at Police Station Madhoganj District Gwalior
(M.P.) for offence punishable under Sections 376, 506 of IPC is hereby
quashed.
8. Petition stands allowed.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Police Station as well
as Court concerned.
(DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL)
JUDGE
MKB
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: MAHENDRA
BARIK
Signing time: 5/12/2023
5:37:19 PM
