The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench while dealing with a criminal application has quashed the rape charges against the accused on the ground that there was a long-standing acquaintance between the widow and accused and that the sexual encounters between them seem to be consensual in nature.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice Abhay S. Waghwase held –

“… taking into account the material available on record which is outcome of thorough investigation, we are of considered opinion that apart from inordinate delay in lodging FIR, the allegations of rape levelled against the applicant does not inspire confidence. In fact, there was long standing acquaintance between applicant and accused. It is difficult to accept that a widow with two children residing in a thickly populated residential locality could be forcibly raped not once but on several occasions. In our considered opinion, whatever sexual encounters took place between informant and applicant apparently seem to be consensual one, in the light of above discussed reasons. Therefore, making present applicant face trial with such allegations would render him not only hardship but great injustice. For ends of justice to meet, we find it a fit case to exercise the inherent power bestowed on this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.”

Senior Advocate Rajendra S. Deshmukh appeared on behalf of the applicant, APP M.M. Nerlikar for the State, and Advocate P.N. Kalani for the informant.

Facts of the Case –

In this case, the informant i.e., the respondent approached the Police Station alleging that she is married and had a son and a daughter and she had also lost her husband because of an ailment of cancer. She claimed that when she was in her house with her children, the accused i.e., the applicant entered her house on the pretext of drinking water, and when she went inside, he followed her, embarrassed her, and brandished a knife and issued threats to kill her. He had forcible sexual intercourse with her. She further informed that the accused threatened to kill her children if she informs anyone. According to her, so to save her children, she did not raise hue and cry. Thereafter repeatedly, under influence of liquor, he used to come to her, threaten to defame her, and against her wish had forcible physical relations with her. She also informed that once accused came with a demand for money and when she informed that she had no money, that time he beat her and forcibly took out her gold ornaments from the cupboard saying that ‘why she needs ornaments when she is a widow’ and took the ornaments informing that he would mortgage it to the jeweller to raise money.

According to the informant, the accused continued to harass her. She claimed that when she informed her parents, the accused went away. He again indulged in aforesaid acts and therefore getting fed up with his conduct and behaviour, she approached the police. On the strength of FIR at her instance, the Police registered crime for offences punishable under Sections 376, 406, 427, 323, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Hence, the accused prayed for the quashing of the FIR and the consequential proceeding by invoking the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

The High Court after hearing contentions of the counsels, noted, “… it is apparent that so called instances of forceful rape which allegedly began from 13.07.2017 are reported to police for the first time directly on 30.01.2018 i.e. after six months. In the FIR there seem to be direct allegations of accused entering her house and forcing himself on her. Whereas, in the supplementary statement which is given by her on 31.01.2018, there is detail narration about her family, about accused-applicant to be her neighbour and regularly visiting her house and even coming to her help at times. Her supplementary statement shows that she had even entrusted her ATM card for operation. Therefore, with such material on record, there is room to presume that there is long standing association between accused-applicant and informant since lifetime of her husband.”

The Court further observed that the jeweller had informed about the applicant being accompanied by the informant twice on the pretext of mortgaging the ornaments for raising money.

The Court also said, “Surprisingly informant’s parents have also given statement to police that their daughter was residing separately and neither she visited them nor she allowed them to come to her house and as such, they were completely unaware of any incident that took place.”

Accordingly, the Court allowed the prayer of the applicant and quashed the charges against him.

Cause Title - Siddhodhan alias Shudhodan v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Click here to read/download the Judgment

Bombay HCJustice Vibha KankanwadiJustice Abhay S. WaghwaseRape Case

Swasti Chaturvedi