Petitioners sought quashing of rape FIR on basis of compromise. Court held petition infructuous after trial court acquitted accused, noting allegations were false and amounted to abuse of process.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
#1#
Crl.M.No.14144-M of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.M.No.14144-M of 2010
Date of Order: 24.8.2010
Anil Bishnoi and others
.....Petitioners
Vs.
State of Haryana and another
.....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. S.S. Walia, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. M.S. Sindhu, Addl.A.G, Haryana.
JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL)
Prayer under Section 482 Cr.P.C is for quashing of FIR No.1016 dated 5.10.2009 under Sections 376/342/506/120-B IPC, P.S City Hisar on the basis of compromise.
Allegations against petitioner No.1-Anil Bishnoi are that he along with his co-accused had taken the complainant-respondent No.2 Pratibha Gupta to a place at Delhi where he committed rape on her. Complainant is stated to have been kept at different places for a period of 20-22 days.
The stand of the petitioners-accused as revealed in the connected petition bearing Crl.M.No.22056-M of 2010 under Section 439 Cr.P.C for grant of bail to petitioner No.1-Anil Bishnoi, is that respondent No.2-Pratibha Gupta and Anil Bishnoi-petitioner No.1 were in love and had solemnized their marriage at Delhi, where petitioner No.2-brother and petitioner No.3-mother of petitioner No.1 were also present. Petitioner
Crl.M.No.14144-M of 2010 #2#
No.1 and respondent No.2 had also approached this court by filing Crl.M.No.21455-M of 2009 for grant of protection as the couple were apprehending threat to their life and liberty at the hands of family members of Pratibha Gupta.
Learned state counsel, on instructions from ASI Suraj Mal, P.S City, Hisar does not dispute the fact that during investigation, statement of respondent No.2 under Section 164 Cr.P.C were recorded before the ld. JMIC, Hisar on 30.9.2009 wherein she has stated in terms of her allegations in the present FIR, however, before the ld. Trial Court in her deposition on 21.8.2010, she has resiled from her earlier statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C and consequently petitioner Nos.1 & 2 have been acquitted by the ld. Trial Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioners, at this stage, prays for withdrawal of the present petition.
In view of the fact that petitioner Nos.1 & 2 have been acquitted, nothing survives in the matter but it is extremely unfortunate that an educated girl has irresponsibly levelled serious allegations against petitioner No.1-Anil Bishnoi and his family members, resulting in petitioner No.1-Anil also suffering more than seven months in custody.
In my opinion, such like attempts amount to abuse of process of court. Experience informs us that the courts are flooded with such like litigation. It is hoped that appropriate action including under Section 193 IPC shall be initiated by the authorities concerned.
Disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.
( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE
August 24, 2010 manoj
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC survives after the trial court acquited the petitioners?
Anil Bishnoi and others
State of Haryana and another
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
