Delhi Court Stays Magistrate's Order Summoning Former Union Minister Shahnawaz Hussain In Rape Case

Hussain was directed to appear before the ACMM court on October 20.

Special Judge MK Nagpal of Rouse Avenue Courts stayed the operation of the order on the criminal revision petition filed by Hussain. He sought stay of the order as well as the proceedings pending before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vaibhav Mehta.

While issuing notice to the prosecution and the victim, the court ordered:

“In view of the submissions being made by Ld. Counsel representing the petitioner, it is also being directed that till then, the operation of impugned order dated 10.10.2023 passed by the Ld. ACMM-03 and further proceedings in the case shall remain stayed.”

The revision petition will now be heard on November 08. The court has ordered that the trial court record be requisitioned atleast two days prior to the next date of hearing.

The FIR was registered on the complaint of a woman alleging the offence of rape and criminal intimidation by Hussain, amongst other offences. After completion of investigation, the Delhi Police filed a cancellation report stating that no case at all was made out. The complainant had then filed a protest petition opposing the cancellation report.

The ACMM had allowed the protest petition and said that the woman gave consistent statements to the police, to the court in her application under Section 156 (3) of Cr.PC and also in her statement given before the concerned Magistrate.

While rejecting the Delhi Police’s cancellation report, the court had said that court can apply its mind independently on the basis of the same material on which the probe agency has reached a conclusion that no offence has been committed and conclude that the offence is prima-facie made out.

The woman alleged that Hussain took her in a farm house and raped her and also threatened her with dire consequences stating that he had prepared a video.

On her complaint which was filed in 2018, a MM Court had passed an order to register the case. The revision petition was filed before sessions court which was dismissed.

A quashing petition was the filed before the Delhi High Court wherein the order of the MM was upheld. The Supreme Court had later declined to interfere with the High Court’s order. Hence a case under Section 376, 328 and 506 of IPC was registered and investigation was carried out.