"Frivolous Case": Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Rape Case Filed By 'Second Wife' After A Delay Of 18 Years

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently quashed a rape case against a man registered at the instance of his 'second wife' as the Court noted that it was a frivolous case and her version indicated false allegations against the man.

The Bench of Justice Anand Pathak observed that it was vexatious and frivolous litigation just to exert pressure on the man to extract money or an attempt made by the prosecutrix ('second wife') to convert domestic dispute into criminal allegations.

The Case in brief

Essentially, the 41-year-old respondent No.2/complainant/prosecutrix lodged an FIR against 55-year-old Manohar Silawat (Applicant/Petitioner) alleging that she was raped by him in the month of May 2001 and as a result whereof, she became pregnant and out of such relation, one child was born.

It was further alleged that thereafter, he used to have physical relationship with her continuously and he used to call her for intermittent payments towards her maintenance amount and used to commit rape, and threatened her with dire consequences. 

On the other hand, challenging the FIR registered against himself and consequential criminal proceedings arising out of the case under Sections 376, 506 of IPC, the petitioner moved the instant Section 482 CrPC.

The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the complainant and the petitioner, both belong to Scheduled Caste and as per their customs, between them, Natra (social customs like live-in/marriage) was performed in which, with the consent of his first wife, the petitioner lived with both of his wives.

It was his further case that when despite the instance of the prosecutrix, the petitioner did not part his whole property in favor of the prosecutrix, then these false allegations have been leveled against him.

The Counsel also referred to an application made by the complainant/alleged victim under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.before Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior seeking maintenance from the petitioner alleging that she is his wife and in July 2019, she was removed by him from his family household.

Court's observations 

At the outset, the Court noted that the prosecutrix had lived with the petitioner and in fact blessed with a boy namely Harsh (now almost 20 years old) and after 18 years, she had filed a complaint on which case has been registered against the petitioner.

Finding her case to be unbelievable, the Court further observed thus:

"When petitioner and prosecutrix lived together as a couple for 18 long years then after such lapse of time any allegation levelled by prosecutrix pales into oblivion because they are primarily motivated to exert pressure. Not only this, perusal of application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed at the instance of respondent No.2 further reveals that on the one hand she levelled the allegations that they lived in live-in relationship but now she makes an application that they lived as married couple. Such divergent stand can only be availed of in case of misrepresentation of facts"

Consequently, the Court opined that It would be a miscarriage of justice if such false allegations are allowed to sustain and the petitioner is unnecessarily dragged into litigation to defend himself. Therefore, the Court quashed the FIR and entire criminal proceedings and allowed the petitioner's plea.

Case title - Manohar Silawat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (MP) 158

Click Here To Read/Download Order