Madhya Pradesh HC Quashes Rape Case Against Accused, Says Earlier FIR Against Other Men By Prosecutrix Points To 'Ulterior Motives' Behind Rape FIR

The Madhya High Court has quashed a rape case against an accused, observing that there was a delay in lodging the FIR and a long standing relationship between him and the prosecutrix.

“There is no allegation that there was false promise to marry. There is also FIR against other men by prosecutrix which shows that FIR has been lodged malafidely due to break in their relationship or for some other ulterior motives,” Justice Vishal Dhagat, said.

The court was hearing the plea of an accused under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking quashing of FIR filed under Section 376(2)(N), 506, 294, 323 of the IPC. The counsel representing the petitioner argued that the prosecutrix is a habitual blackmailer and has earlier also filed FIRs against two other men.

According to the prosecution, the victim was known to the petitioner for the past four years. He is alleged to have approached her under the pretense of friendship and taken her to a rented house in Maheshpur, where he allegedly forcefully committed rape. Over the course of the past four years, he maintained a physical relationship with her and subjected her to threats, warning that if she refused to engage in a physical relationship with him, he would take her life, according to the complaint against him. The petitioner's harassment became so severe that the victim resorted to consuming Harpic, according to the prosecution.

Taking note of the fact that a similar account was provided by her in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC, the court said she revealed that she had become pregnant twice as a result of her relationship with the accused, and he had forced her to undergo two abortions.

"When she asked him to marry he used to tell that he will talk to his family members and when she again requested him to marry her he started beating her. It is submitted that during one such assault he broke her leg," the court noted.

However, it observed that it has not been stated in the written complaint that petitioner promised to marry her and thereafter he committed sexual intercourse with her.

"It was also not stated that he gave a promise to marry the prosecutrix and thereafter established a physical relationship with her. It was only stated that he took her to a house to talk to her regarding their friendship and has raped her. No complaint was made at that time and thereafter many times both of them established physical relationship. It has not been stated that during these time any promise of marriage was given to prosecutrix. Later on, it was stated that she will be killed by petitioner if she refuses to establish relationship," it added.

The court also observed that she improved her version in the statement given under Section 164 of the CrPC that he made a promise to marry the prosecutrix.

"Prosecutrix has also lodged FIR against other persons but later on she turned hostile in Court and they had been acquitted. Allegation of malafide and blackmailing was also made in the writ petition," it added.

Relying on State of Haryana and Others v. Bhajanlal and Others, the court said it is apparent that "the case of petitioner will be covered under Clause 7, wherein it was held that, “extraordinary power of the High Court could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any Court… where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”

Case Title: Mohd Faheem Khan v. State of MP & Ors.

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (MP) 77

Advocate Sakshi Bhardwaj appeared for the petitioner.

Click Here To Read/Download Order