The Madhya Pradesh High Court in its order dated June 09, 2022 quashed a rape case against a man, that was registered at the instance of his ‘second wife’. The Court noted that it was a frivolous case and her version indicated false allegations against the man.
The High Court also remarked that the false rape case was only an attempt by the wife to extract money and convert a domestic dispute into a criminal case.
READ ORDER | Wife Insisting Her Husband To Live Separately From Parents & Threatening False Dowry Case Amounts To Mental Cruelty: Chhattisgarh High Court
Case:
Accused/petitioner in the case is a 55-year-old man named Manohar Silawat and the complainant/respondent in the matter is 41-year-old woman, who happens to be his second wife. According to her FIR, she accused the man of raping her in May 2001, and as a result she became pregnant out of that sexual relation. Later, she gave birth to the child.
The woman then alleged that, thereafter, petitioner used to have physical relationship with her continuously and when after four years she came back to Gwalior, the petitioner used to call her for intermittent payments towards her maintenance amount and used to commit rape and threatened her with dire consequences.
Presently the woman is living with her adult son at Gwalior. Now, another child is born out of the wedlock of petitioner and complainant, and therefore, she filed charges of rape against the petitioner.
READ ORDER | India Is Conservative Society; Girls Don’t Indulge In Sex Unless Backed By Assurance Of Marriage
Defense By Accused
Challenging the FIR registered against him under Sections 376, 506 of IPC, the petitioner moved the instant Section 482 CrPC arguing 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 favour of the prosecutrix, then these false rape allegations have been levelled against him.
The Counsel pointed out to the application made by the woman under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior demanding maintenance from the petitioner alleging that she is his wife and in July 2019, she was removed by him from his family household.
PODCAST: CLICK BELOW
Section 498-A Challenges | Discussion With Raghav Awasthi
Madhya Pradesh High Court
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 High Court noted that the woman had lived with the petitioner for 18-years and in fact the couple was blessed with a boy. It is only after almost two decades that she had filed a rape complaint on which this case has been registered against the petitioner. The Court remarked,
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.
READ ORDER | Woman Files Rape Case On Brother-in-Law After Leaving Husband’s Home 7-YRS Ago; Court Grants Bail
The High Court added,
Here, it appears that from the very perusal of contents of FIR, no offence is made out and perusal of charge-sheet and different statements further substantiates the arguments of petitioner.
Besides that, it appears to be vexatious and frivolous litigation just to exert pressure over petitioner to extract money or an attempt made by prosecutrix to convert domestic dispute into criminal allegations.
It would be miscarriage of justice if such false allegations are allowed to sustain and petitioner is unnecessarily dragged into litigation to defend himself.
Thus, the Court quashed the FIR and the petitioner stands discharged from all criminal allegations.
MUST WATCH – ARE QUESTIONS ON MISUSE OF ONE SIDED MARITAL RAPE LAW JUSTIFIED?
Marital Rape Verdict | Advocate J Sai Deepak | Other Side
READ ORDER | False Rape Case By Second Wife Only To Extract Money & Convert Domestic Dispute Into Criminal Case: Madhya Pradesh High Court
— Voice For Men India (@voiceformenind) June 16, 2022
▪️Couple lived together for 18-years
▪️2019 Domestic Dispute
▪️Woman charges husband of #MaritalRape in May 2001https://t.co/01QHWfZXVg
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
If you find value in our work, you may choose to donate to Voice For Men Foundation via Milaap OR via UPI: voiceformenindia@hdfcbank (80G tax exemption applicable)
Follow Us
