Allahabad HC Quashes CJM's Order Rejecting Rape Victim's S. 156 (3) CrPC Plea For Police Probe, Remands Matter Back

The Allahabad High Court last week quashed an order of a Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) rejecting an application moved by a rape victim under section 156 (3) CrPC seeking a police probe in the allegations of rape made by her against the accused.

The bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi also remanded the matter back to the CJM's court with a direction to re-consider and re-visit the entire matter once again and decide the same in the light of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of XYZ vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 676.

It may be noted that in the XYZ case (supra), the Top Court had held that a Judicial Magistrate has the duty to order police investigation under Section 156(3) of CrPC when the complaint prima facie shows the commission of the cognizable offence, especially in sexual offences, and the facts indicate the need for a police investigation.

Read more about the case here: S 156(3) CrPC - Magistrate Should Order Police Investigation When Cognizable Offence Is Prima Facie Found, Especially In Sexual Offences: Supreme Court

The case in brief

Essentially, in the instant case, the rape victim is a married woman having two children who are 18 and 14 years of age. As per the allegations, opposite party no.2/accused was having a lustful eye over her and he used to tease her and on this account, she got disturbed. She restrained him not to do these misbehaving deeds but he did not downward.

During the intervening period, the accused convinced the victim petitioner to go with him to his house and collect the study material for her examination, however, when she got to know that he was living there alone, she tried to come back but the accused allegedly bolted the door from inside and ravished her and also taken her obscene photos and videography.

She went to the police station and gave an application for lodging of the F.I.R., however, no action was taken, therefore, she sent an application to the S.P., Meerut but none of the authorities paid any heed to her request.

Thereafter, she moved an application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, however, the same was rejected in July 2021. Pursuant to this, she moved a revision before the court of District & Session Judge, Meerut and the same was rejected too (on April 18, 2022) affirming the order of C.J.M.

Consequently, she moved to the High Court with the instant plea assailing the legality and validity of both orders.

High Court's observations

Taking into account the facts of the case, at the outset, the Court referred to the XYZ case (supra) to note that the Courts should press upon the police for investigation in sexual harassment/sexual assault cases involving the weaker section of the society, where the victim is already under the stage of trauma.

The Court further noted that in such cases, the Courts are expected to remain cognizant of the fact that the legal process tends to be even more onerous for complainants who are potentially dealing with trauma and societal shame due to the unwarranted stigma attached to victims of sexual harassment and assault

"The Court should be sensitive enough to fathom the agony and the mental trauma faced by the poor victim and it is the onerous responsibility of the courts to agitate the police agency to hold an in-depth probe into the matter," the Court added.

Against this backdrop, holding that the impugned orders fell short of the standard set up by Apex Court in XYZ Case (supra), the Court quashed the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the CJM court to re-consider and re-visit the entire matter once again by passing a well-reasoned order within a period of six weeks.

With this, the petition was disposed of.

Case title - XYZ vs. State of UP and 2 others [MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 6105 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 539

Click Here To Read/Download Order