Failed Relationship Not Ground To Lodge FIR For Repeated Rape U/S 376(2)(n) IPC: Andhra Pradesh High Court

Brief Facts of the Case

The Criminal Petition was filed under Sections 437 and 439 of Criminal Procedure Code seeking regular bail by the petitioner/Accused No. 1 registered for offence of committing repeated rape on same woman punishable under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC.

The case of the prosecution in brief was that the defacto complainant gave a complaint that she was having acquaintance with the petitioner/Accused No. 1 since 16 months and the said acquaintance turned into love. It is alleged that the petitioner, on the pretext of love and marrying with the defacto complainant, took her to his residence and exploited her sexually. When defacto complainant's menstrual cycle got interrupted, she doubted that she might be pregnant. The petitioner and his family gave her some tablets and the menstrual cycle got resumed. It is alleged by the defacto complainant that since that time, the petitioner and his parents avoided her and abused her over the phone. Hence, the above crimes was registered.

Contentions of both sides

The counsel for petitioner contended that the allegations in the FIR were vague and bald and prima facie did not constitute any offence much less the offences alleged in the FIR. It was contended that when the parents of Accused No. 1 did not agree for the marriage, the defacto complainant foisted the false case. In support of his contention, the counsel for the petitioner relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Ansaar Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan (2022 Live Law (SC) 599).

On the other hand, Special Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations were serious in nature. He submitted that if bail was granted, the petitioner may not cooperate with the investigation. However, as per the Final Opinion of the Gynaecologist, there was nothing suggestive of any recent sexual intercourse.

Finding of the Court

Perusal of the record showed that there was consent between the de facto complainant and the petitioner and it was also prima facie evident that when the defacto complainant felt that the relationship between her and the petitioner was not going to work out, she filed the present complaint.

Justice Ravi Cheemalapati was of the view that the complaint was lodged when the relationship was not working out. Since the Apex Court decision squarely was applicable to the facts of the case, the Court granted regular bail with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition was allowed.

Case Title : JATOTH ADITYA RATHOD Versus State of Andhra Pradesh

Click Here To Read/Download Order