'Honey Trap Case': Gujarat High Court Quashes Rape FIR Citing Consensual Relationship, Notes Complainant Tried To Extort Money

The Gujarat High Court quashed a rape FIR against a man, after noting that it was a case of 'honey trap' wherein the complainant had consensual relations with the accused and subsequently tried to extort money from him. The FIR was registered under IPC Sections 376(1)(rape), 114(Abettor present when offence is committed), 506(1)(2) (criminal intimidation) IPC making accusations against four persons, wherein petitioner is named as accused no.1. Against the FIR the petitioner had approached the high court. Referring to provisions alleged against the petitioner and Supreme Court's decision in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992), Justice MK Thakker in her order noted:"On referring the above provisions and the facts of the present case, it emerges that this is a case of honey trap and not, in any manner, a case of rape. Keeping the video on, indulging into physical relations, sending friend request, time and again accompanied the applicant is nothing but consensual relations made by the complainant which was subsequently used to extort the money. In that background, the applicant cannot be sent for the trial for false allegations. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the case of applicant falls under the criteria (i) and (v) of the judgment in the case of Bhajanlal (supra)". The court referred to the allegations made in the FIR and noted that the complainant is a married woman aged 38 years. The court noted that as per the FIR a friend request was made by the first informant on Facebook account to the petitioner and in turn, the petitioner had responded, and thereafter, on various occassions they had made calls to each other. "For the first incident which is stated to have been occurred in the office of the present applicant situated at Vesu, there was no specific date and time stated in the FIR. It is stated that after consuming the cold drinks she felt dizziness, and regained consciousness after one and half hours, and then after she left on her Activa. Second time, when she was called at the house of accused no.4, she was offered to consume the liquor which she denied, and had left the house of accused no.4. There after also, there was no dates and time stated but has mentioned that after two months of the second incident, she again went to meet the applicant at the house of accused no.4 where she was proposed to make friendship by the present applicant which she denied," the court noted. The court noted the fourth time, she went to a mall and she accompanied petitioner to his car where along with the other accused the complainant came to the house of one Bipin Ramani situated at Dumas. "Thereafter, fifth time, the applicant visited the beauty parlour of the first informant where she was offered to visit the office in 2-3 days preparing the meal of 4-5 persons. She went there on 23.10.2020, and recorded the video in her mobile of physical relations with the applicant. Again, on number of occasions, she accompanied the applicant and developed physical relations," the court noted. The petitioner argued that the the complainant had made physical relations with him and had tried to extort money or to blackmail him. It was submitted that the transcript of the call recording between the petitioner and complainant suggests that time and again the complainant had demanded money. When she demanded ornaments of the petitioner's wife and was denied, it resulted in an FIR. It was alleged that the complainant had demanded that the petitioner has to give Rs.60,00,000 to settle the dispute or give the ornaments of the wife. It was submitted that the complainant had entered into physical relations with the petitioner with the consent, however, he became a victim of honey trap. The court quashed the FIR.Case title: MANOJBHAI KACHRABHAI VASOYA v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 10969 of 2021Click Here To Read/Download OrderCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Guj) 138

'Honey Trap Case': Gujarat High Court Quashes Rape FIR Citing Consensual Relationship, Notes Complainant Tried To Extort Money

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

'Honey Trap Case': Gujarat High Court Quashes Rape FIR Citing Consensual Relationship, Notes Complainant Tried To Extort Money

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers