Trial Would Leave Child & Complainant in Lurch: Karnataka HC Quashes Rape Case Against Man Who Married Complainant Later
The Karnataka High Court quashed a rape case against a man who married the complainant after she filed the complaint against him.
The High Court observed that permitting the husband now to undergo trial would leave the child and complainant in lurch.
The Petitioner approached the High Court calling in question the proceedings in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 354A, 376, 493 of IPC.
The Single-Judge Bench of Justice M.Nagaprasanna asserted, “In the light of the aforesaid circumstance of marriage between the petitioner and the complainant, I deem it appropriate to obliterate the crime against the petitioner.”
Advocate Nikitha N. represented the Petitioners while HCGP Harish Ganapathy represented the Respondents.
The respondent-complainant and the accused petitioner are in a relationship which appears to have turned sour on the score that the petitioner got himself involved in an analogous crime of possession of contraband substance of 76kgs of Ganja. The crime was registered before the jurisdictional Police and the incident took place after the engagement ceremony between the petitioner and respondent -complainant. The petitioner was said to have gone hiding due to the registration of the criminal case against him.
The going of the petitioner absconding and drawing of the complainant as accused in the NDPS case, led the complainant to register a crime for cheating and rape for the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of IPC. The petitioner and complainant are said to be living today together and also have a child born from the wedlock. But the offence continues to hang on the head of the petitioner.
It was the case of the petitioner that the complainant in the fit of thought that the petitioner had run away after getting engaged, registered the crime for the offence punishable under Section 376 and 417 of IPC. Today, they are living happily and therefore, this Crime should not be permitted to continue. The Counsel appearing for the respondent/complainant also submitted that since they are living together and have a child, the complainant is not interested in pursuing the matter any further.
However, the HCGP sought dismissal of the petition and contended that since the petitioner is alleged of the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 417 of the IPC, he should come out clean in a full blown trial.
The Bench noticed that after the registration of the crime in the missing case, it transpired that the jurisdictional Police at Andhra Pradesh filed a ‘B report’(Closure Report) in the Drugs case. The realization dawned on both of them that they have to get married and they got married after filing of the ‘B report’ as aforesaid. By then, the complainant had registered the crime.The Bench took into consideration the complainant’s submission that as on the date of registration of the impugned crime, the complainant was carrying and therefore, they got married and now have a child.
In these circumstances, where the offences are not even met to its remotest sense, the Bench observed that permitting the husband now to undergo trial would leave the child and complainant in the lurch.
Thus, allowing the Petition, the Bench quashed the proceedings in question.
Cause Title: EJAS P P v. State Of Karnataka [Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC:50223]
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Nikitha N.
Respondent: HCGP Harish Ganapathy, Advocate Yuktha N.
