Rohit Singh Rawat v. State & Anr.

1. A Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR No.112/2024 under Section 376/506 IPC Police Station Neb Sarai.

2. The petitioner has stated that the parties admittedly had a consensual relationship, but the complainant out of sheer vengeance in order to extort more money from the petitioner, got the FIR in question registered by giving a complaint dated 04.01.2024 to DCP, South District, Delhi. The entire complaint does not reflect that the relations between the parties were established on the pretext of marriage. It is further submitted that subsequent to registration of FIR on 28.01.2024, the petitioner herein was arrested on 20.02.2024.

3. In the statement of respondent No.2 recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 30.01.2024, she made material improvements. For the first time she alleged that the petitioner had promised to marry her. Pertinently, it was her own admission that respondent No.2 had complete knowledge of law and offence and she used to teach the petitioner about these offences in their conversation. She further admitted that disputes arose between them on account of the fact that he got back into the relationship with his exgirlfriend.

4. She herself has also stated that initially there was no promise to marry for establishing physical relationship. She went on to make allegation of drugs, illegal activities against the petitioner for which no evidence was found by the Investigating Officer in the Chargesheet. It is evident that she was making false allegations in order to implicate the petitioner. She had even told the petitioner that till such time he does not marry her, she should be maintained and paid rent by him.

5. Learned ASJ, South District, Delhi at the time of hearing of bail application, had noted certain observations which prima facie show that respondent No.2 had filed the complaint in order to harass the petitioner, which has been admitted by her at the time of hearing of bail application. The respondent No.2 also admitted during the hearing of bail application, that she was demanding money from the petitioner through his friend Rinku. She also admitted the WhatsApp Chat between her and Rinku. It was observed by the learned ASJ that there was nothing on record to show that the petitioner was not having any intention to marry the prosecutrix since beginning. It was also observed that both the parties were in consensual relationship. The petitioner was released on regular bail vide detailed Order dated 24.02.2024

6. The Chargesheet has been filed in this present case in April, 2024 under Section 376/506 IPC to which Section 377 IPC has been added in hand by the Investigating Officer.

7. During the investigations, Rinku friend of the petitioner gave a copy of Whatsapp chat between him and respondent No.2 from which it is clear that she was extorting money from the petitioner through him, being the friend of the petitioner as he had already blocked her number; the entire chat along with the screen shots of the payment made by the petitioner to respondent No.2 were placed on record.

8. In fact, the complainant had approached Police Station Neb Sarai on 20.12.2023, wherein their issues were resolved by mutual understanding and DD bearing No.105A dated 20.12.2023 was accordingly recorded wherein she denied any kind of sexual assault upon her.

9. Thereafter, the petitioner himself on 31.12.2023 before the registration of the FIR in question, had made a complaint at Police Station Geeta Colony against respondent No.2 wherein he had expressed an apprehension that respondent No.2 would turn her threats into action of implicating him in a fake rape case. Then, another compromise was effected between the parties on 01.01.2024 at Police Station Geeta Colony.

10. Before registration of the FIR, respondent No.2 twice entered into the settlement and thereafter demanded money and when her demands were not fulfilled, the FIR has been registered. The circumstances clearly reflect the malafide in getting the FIR registered.

11. It is further stated that during the investigations, respondent No.2 refused to hand over her mobile on the ground of privacy. She also refused to get her medical examination done. From the contents of the Chargesheet and supporting documents/evidence, it is abundantly clear that present is a case of extortion by respondent No.2 and there is no incriminating evidence against the petitioner.

12. In the end, it is submitted that no fruitful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the absence of medical evidence. Further, the WhatsApp Chats and other documents establish non-commission of the offence. It is, therefore, submitted that the FIR and all the proceedings emanating there from may be quashed.

13. The Status Report has been filed by the State, wherein all the aforementioned facts have been narrated and it has been further explained that the victim had been served with a Notice under Section 91 Cr.P.C. to produce the documents and articles i.e her mobile phone and messages, conversations and her MLC. Some WhatsApp Chats have been submitted with Rinku @ Lucky friend of the petitioner, wherein she had been asking for marriage. The statements of the Security Guards of the building namely Baijju and Caretaker Krishan Kant @ Mandeep have been recorded. The Rent Agreement has also been collected. In the end, it is submitted that after completion of investigations, the Chargesheet against the accused have been filed before the Court. Section 377 IPC has been added on the basis of statement of the victim. The mobile phones of the accused and Rinku which had been seized, have been sent for forensic examination to FSL, Rohini which shall be filed along with the supplementary Chargesheet. The matter is pending before Ld. ASJ for arguments on charge.

14. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated the submissions made in the petition. She has vehemently contended that the complainant on two previous occasions had compromised the matter with the petitioner before the FIR was eventually registered. There is voluminous evidence by way of WhatsApp Chats and the Statement of the Prosecutrix which make it abundantly evident that it is only a case of extortion of money from the petitioner. This fact also finds corroboration from the observations made by the learned ASJ while granting bail to the petitioner.

15. The counsel for the prosecutrix has further submitted that while she was in relationship with the petitioner, she was beaten severally on many occasions and was threatened against reporting the matter to the Police or to any other Authority. She is a young girl of 21 years living alone in Delhi, having no support. She has been living a life of perpetual fear and has an apprehension of safety of her life. She, despite having been taken advantage of by the petitioner, was not in a position to report the matter. She reaffirms that there was a promise of marriage made by the petitioner and that she had been physically and sexually abused. It is submitted that even though the Chargesheet has been filed, but instead of facing the trial it is appropriate that the FIR should be quashed by this Court.