Quashing FIR of sexual assault, Delhi Excessive Courtroom says some use authorized provisions to ‘harass’ males

A view of the Delhi Excessive Courtroom. File
| Photograph Credit score: The Hindu

“The offence of rape is among the most heinous crimes in opposition to girls however some folks use the authorized provisions in opposition to it as a weapon to unnecessarily harass their male counterparts,” the Delhi Excessive Courtroom has noticed whereas quashing an FIR in opposition to a person.

The petitioner had moved the courtroom, looking for to quash the FIR lodged in opposition to him for allegedly sexually assaulting a girl with whom he was earlier in a relationship. The Excessive Courtroom famous that the FIR was nothing however an afterthought.

Editorial | Crime and disgrace: On the France mass rape case 

It stated the recordings, WhatsApp chats and statements recorded earlier than the Justice of the Peace clearly established that the components of the offence of rape weren’t met as the person and the lady had consensually agreed to enter right into a bodily relationship, which was additionally not based mostly on false guarantees of marriage.

“It’s true that the supply underneath which the FIR has been lodged is among the most heinous crimes in opposition to girls. Nevertheless, additionally it is a longtime undeniable fact that some folks use it as a weapon to unnecessarily harass the male counterpart,” Justice Chandra Dhari Singh stated in a current judgment.

The courtroom stated the case was a basic instance of how an harmless individual confronted undue hardships owing to the misuse of the penal provision and due to this fact, it was of the agency view that nothing would come out of the case if the matter was subjected to trial.

It noticed that the courts have been duty-bound to look into the potential for the presence of an ulterior motive on the a part of the prosecutrix to hunt vengeance from the person. The counsel for the person submitted that the petitioner and the complainant had been in a relationship earlier and had established bodily relations with consent.

“Owing to some discord, the person and the complainant didn’t marry one another and later, a rape case was lodged in opposition to him,” the counsel stated.

Nevertheless, the prosecutor opposed the quashing petition and stated there have been severe allegations in opposition to the petitioner and the criticism clearly establishes that he had sexually assaulted the lady.

Contemplating the fabric on file, the courtroom famous that the lady was in fixed contact with the petitioner they usually each used to share particulars about their life every day and different private particulars.

“It’s not disputed by the petitioner that the events had entered right into a bodily relationship, nonetheless, he claims the identical to be consensual. It is usually established from the assertion recorded underneath Part 164 of the Code of Felony Process (CrPC) of the prosecutrix that the events had taken steps to get married, nonetheless, the households didn’t agree as a result of caste issue,” it famous.

The courtroom additional famous that regardless of the reservations from the person’s household, he was able to get married to the lady, however she didn’t present any curiosity afterward and entered right into a relationship with one other individual.

“The WhatsApp chats between the events additionally present that the prosecutrix had despatched a number of messages to the petitioner and conveyed info concerning her determination to get married to a different individual. Due to this fact, the moment FIR is nothing however an afterthought,” it added.