'Malicious Prosecution': Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Rape FIR Against An Indian Railway Officer

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Tuesday quashed an FIR registered against the then Additional Divisional Railway Manager, Bhopal Gaurav Singh for raping a clerk working under him calling it a case of 'malicious prosection' and an 'abuse of process of law'.Having analyzed the records of the case, the bench of Justice Sanjay Dwivedi noted that the victim in the case had put up a false allegation against the petitioner possibly under the pressure of her husband as her husband had a suspicion about the relationship between the petitioner (Singh) and the complainant/victim.The case in briefThe FIR in the case registered on May 7, 2022, against Singh under Sections 376(2)(n) and 506 of IPC by the victim alleging that the incident took place between March 21, 2021, and May 4, 2022. It was also alleged that on May 4, 2022, when the complainant/respondent No.2 was staying in a railway retiring room, the petitioner came to that room and developed physical relationship.Now, challenging the FIR, Singh moved the court by submitting that he had been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. It was stated by his counsel before the Court that there was a marital discord between the complainant and her husband, pursuant to which a case was also lodged by the husband of the complainant on April 28, 2022, wherein it was also alleged that his wife and the petitioner/accused had committed forgery of Rs.15,00,000/- and jewelry and also an alleged conspiracy of the petitioner and the complainant against the husband of the complainant.It was further submitted that in that complaint, the statement of the alleged victim/complainant was recorded by the SHO, Mahila Thana, Harda on May 4, and further on May 6, she tried to commit suicide after fighting with her husband, however, suddenly, the next day, on May 7, she leveled allegations of rape against the petitioner, which, according to the petitioner, was totally false with an avowed intention to harass the petitioner.In essence, it was the case of the petitioner that the intention of the complainant was to harass him by lodging a report against him and using same as a weapon against him and that the sequel of incidents as mentioned in the FIR clearly proved that no offence was constituted.On the other hand, the Counsel for the state submitted that being a higher officer, the petitioner exploited the complainant and on his pressure, she surrendered before him and as such, without her consent, the petitioner developed physical relation which falls within the definition of rape.Court's observationsTaking into account the facts and record of the case, the Court, at the outset, noted that as per the Supreme Court's rulings, the High Court can quash the FIR by execersiing its powers under Section 482 CrPC at initial stage to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.In this backdrop, noting that in the instant case, while her statement was being recorded in the complaint lodged by her husband, she had not levelled any allegations against the petitiner/accused and even after committing suicide, she informed the police that she would lodge complaint against her husband, however, on the very next day i.e. on 07.05.2022 she made a complaint to the police against the petitioner alleging allegation of rape."There is no explanation and disclosure of the complainant/respondent No.2 as to what had happened within 48 hours with her which compelled her to change her statement because on 05.05.2022 before the police she denied relationship with the petitioner that too on a specific question even raised by the police. It is, therefore, now clear that the complainant/respondent No.2 without any probable cause initiated criminal proceeding against the petitioner. The over all conduct of the complainant/respondent No.2 appears to be suspicious because a day before lodging the FIR she has repeatedly denied her relationship with the petitioner and on the contrary shown great 19 respect towards him."Further, noting that the vicitm and her husband were fighting against each other and the complainant herself levelled serious allegations against her husband saying that he was a person of criminal mentality, misbehaving with her and with the ill-treatment given by him the complainant tried to commit suicide, and hence, the Court observed thus:"...it can be gathered that for some reason best known to the complainant, she has made false allegation against the petitioner and that might be under the pressure of her husband because her husband in his complaint shown suspicion about the relationship between the petitioner and the complainant/respondent No.2."Thus, holding that the allegation made by the complainant/respondent No.2 against the petitioner in the FIR and initiating criminal proceeding against him was nothing but an abuse of the process of law, the Court quashed the FIR.Case title - GAURAV SINGH CHADHAR vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH and another Case Citation:...

'Malicious Prosecution': Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Rape FIR Against An Indian Railway Officer

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags