The petitioner had moved the court, seeking to quash the FIR lodged against him for alleged🍎ly sexually assaulting a🐓 woman with whom he was earlier in a relationship.
The offence of rape is one of the most heinous crimes against women but some people use the legal provisi♔ons against it as a weapon to unnecessarily harass their male counterparts, the Delhi High Court has observed while quashing an FIR against a man.
The petitioner🅰 had moved the court, seeking to quash the FIR lodged against him for allegedly sexually assaulting a woman with whom he was earlier in a relationsꦑhip. The high court noted that the FIR was nothing but an afterthought.
It said the recordings, WhatsApp chats and statements recorded before the magistr😼ate clearly established that the ingredients of the offence of rape were not met as the ma🀅n and the woman had consensually agreed to enter into a physical relationship, which was also not based on false promises of marriage.
"It is true that the provision under which the FIR has been lodged is one of the most heinous cri𓂃mes against women. However, i💦t is also an established fact that some people use it as a weapon to unnecessarily harass the male counterpart," Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said in a recent judgment.
T♋he court said the case was a classic example of how an innocent person faced undue hardships due to the misuse of the penal provision and therefore, it was of ꧃the firm view that nothing would come out of the case if the matter was subjected to trial.
It observed that the courts were duty-bound toꦬ look into the possibility of the presence of an ♕ulterior motive on the part of the prosecutrix to seek vengeance from the man.
The counsel for the man submitted that the petition🌼er and the complainant had been in a relationship earlier and had established physical relat෴ions with consent.
Due to some discord, the man ༺and the🦩 complainant did not marry each other and later, a rape case was lodged against him, the counsel said.
Howeไver, the prosecutor opposed the quashing petition and said there were serious allegations against the petitioner and the complaint clearly 🐼establishes that he had sexually assaulted the woman.
Considering the material on record, the court noted that the woman was in constant touch wiওth the petitioner and they both used to share details about their life on a daily basis and other personal details.
"It is not disputed by the petitioner that the parties had entered into a physical relationship, however, he claims the same to be consensual. It i🐈s also established from the statement recorded under section 164 of the CrPC of the prosecutrix that the parties had taken steps to get married, however, the families did not agree due to the cas🍎te factor," it noted.
The court further noted that despite the reservations from the man's family, he was ready to get married to the woman, but 🌞she did not show any interest later on and entered int🔯o a relationship with another person.
"The WhatsApp chats between the parties also show that the prosecutrix had sent severa🍸l messages to the petitioner and conveyed information regarding her decision to get married to another person. Therefore, the instaꦕnt FIR is nothing but an afterthought," it added.