Rape Allegations Appears To Be Concocted And Fabricated With A Malafide Intention To Harass: Allahabad HC While Quashing Case
The Allahabad High Court, under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), quashed an alleged malafide rape proceedings against the Applicant, reiterating that ‘judicial process should not be instrumental or oppressive for needless harassment’.
The Court allowed an Application under Section 482 of the CrPC seeking to quash the entire proceedings pursuant to the charge sheet as well as the cognizance order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) arising out of a case registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court emphasised that the allegations made against the Applicant appear to be false, concocted and fabricated with a malafide intention.
Justice Sameer Jain observed, “Therefore, from the discussion made above, it appears that from the face of it the allegations made against the applicant appears to be false, concocted and fabricated one and no prima facie offence of rape and threatening against the applicant is made out…The law is settled that the judicial process should not be instrumental or oppressive for needless harassment and if this Court finds that proceeding pending against the accused is abuse of the process of law and it has been instituted with mala fide intention or ulterior motive with a view for wrecking vengeance then this Court should exercise the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and should quash the proceedings pending against the accused to prevent an abuse of the process of Court and to secure the ends of justice”.
Senior Advocate Kamal Krishna with Advocate Awadhesh Kumar Saxena appeared for the Applicant and Advocate Santosh Kumar Pandey with Government Advocate Rajendra Kumar Dubey and Additional Government Advocate S.B. Maurya appeared for the Respondent/State.
The Sister-in-law (Informant) of the Applicant lodged an FIR under Sections 376 and 506 of the IPC. She contended that after the demise of her husband, the Applicant tried to develop a physical relationship with her. Due to such attempts and the conduct of the family towards her, she returned to her paternal home. The Informant alleged that one morning, the Applicant arrived at her paternal home and proposed to her. Later he induced her to smell some substance and thereafter committed rape with her. When the Informant gained consciousness she saw that the Appellant had committed rape with her and was sleeping on the same bed. When the Informant told him that she would complain, the Applicant blackmailed her by threatening to release the video clip of rape on social media. Applicant again raped her, threatening to release the video. The Informant also alleged that the Applicant committed rape under the false promise of marriage and then refused to perform marriage with her. Although, during the investigation, no alleged videograph of the alleged incident of rape was recovered. The Informant contended that Applicant had prepared the videographs of rape but then deleted the same. An Application under Section 482 of the CrPC was filed before the Court seeking to quash the entire proceedings pursuant to the charge sheet as well as the cognizance order passed by the CJM arising out of a case registered under Sections 376 and 506 IPC.
The Court placed reliance on the Supreme Court Dictum in the cases of Kapil Agarwal and others v Sanjay Sharma and others [(2021) 5 SCC 524], Prabhatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v State of Gujarat and another [(2017) 9 SCC 641], M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v State of Maharashtra and others AIR [(2021) SC 1918] and State of Haryana and others v Bhajan Lal and other [1992 Supp (1) SCC 335]. The Court reiterated that under Section 482 of the CrPC, the Court cannot scuttle a legitimate prosecution at its inception and the inherent power should be used sparingly with abundant caution. However, at the same time, if it appears that even if entire allegations are accepted and no offence is made out or proceedings have been initiated with the mala-fide intention only to harass the accused persons then in the interest of justice and to secure the ends of justice the Court can invoke its jurisdiction and quash the proceedings.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Application and quashed the impugned proceedings as well as the charge sheet.
Cause Title: Prashant Saxena v State of U.P. and Anr
