POCSO Act |Rajasthan HC Allows Woman’s Plea To Quash Rape Case Filed By Her Against Boyfriend

The original case had been filed under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). At the time of filing, the complainant was 17 years old, which is below the legal age of consent, while her boyfriend was 21. The case emerged after it was discovered that the complainant was pregnant.

The complainant had previously sought the termination of her pregnancy but now expressed a desire to live with her husband and have a family. The ongoing criminal case was preventing the couple from enjoying their married life, prompting the Court to quash the FIR and order the release of the accused.

A Single Bench of Justice Arun Monga said, “I am of the view that, in light of the factual narrative noted above, this is a fit case to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. (528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) in the larger interest of justice and to avoid hardship to the parties, enabling them to live together in a congenial atmosphere and develop the harmony essential for a happy married life.”

Advocate Dolly Jaiswal appeared for the petitioner, while Public Prosecutor Gaurav Singh appeared for the respondent.

The Court noted that during the accused's interim bail period in May of this year, the complainant married him according to Hindu customs. It further noted that it is unusual for a complainant in a rape case to later seek the quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) she initially filed.

The Court highlighted the peculiarity of the case, stating that it warranted the Court's discretionary power under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to serve the broader interests of justice. The ruling aimed to allow the couple to live together harmoniously and foster a stable family environment.

The Court was informed that the complainant had originally filed the FIR under family pressure, as her consensual relationship with the accused had become public due to her pregnancy. At the time, she was not of legal age to marry, and her family strongly opposed their relationship.

Despite initially supporting the prosecution during the trial, the complainant later clarified that this was due to her family’s coercion. She and the accused reached a written compromise in February of this year, after she turned 18.

The Court’s order specifically quashed FIR, all related legal proceedings for offences under Sections 363 and 376(2)(n) of the IPC, as well as Sections 4, 5j(ii), and 6 of the POCSO Act, were also annulled.

Cause Title: Madam ‘W’ v. State of Rajasthan & Anr., [2024:RJ-JD:33604]

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Dolly Jaiswal and Hemank Viashnav