In case of where a ‘husband’ charged with offence of kidnapping and rape against his ‘wife’ by the wife’s family, the Supreme Court on Thursday observed that the only thing being canvassed before the Court is that the husband had some pre-marital love affairs, which can hardly be a case under Section 376 IPC.
A Bench comprising Justice SK Kaul and Justice MM Sundresh made the observations in a special leave petition filed against Karnataka High Court’s order refusing to quash the FIR’s filed against the petitioner husband, his family members and friends for offences of kidnapping and rape under:
- Section 363
- Section 376
- Section 34
…of the Indian Penal Code
While according to the petitioner husband the present case has been filed by the parents and relatives of the girl who were against her marriage with him, the High Court had relied on a statement given by the wife saying that petitioner had forced her into marrying him.
The court noted,
In an endeavour to find out whether a quietus can be put to the matter in some positive way, we consider appropriate that the petitioner/husband and the girl/wife should remain present in Court.
Case:
The present special leave petition filed has stated that the matter is an outcome of love marriage opposed by the parents and relatives of the girl who had eloped with the Petitioner and married him, reported Livelaw.
According to the petitioners when the girl’s parents who vehemently opposed her relationship and marriage with the Petitioner husband became aware of the fact that their daughter was residing, she was abducted from petitioners’ house.
This was followed by a voluntarily statement allegedly given by the wife before police in May 2016. The Petitioner husband was then taken into custody in July 2016 but was subsequently released on bail. The other Petitioners have secured anticipatory bail.
Girl’s Statement
In voluntary statement given by the girl before the police, she stated that the petitioner threatened her that if she doesn’t marry him he will die. Later he ‘forcibly took her to the temple’, got married to her and took her to Kerala. The statement states that she was harassed by his family members and seeks legal action against the petitioners and others who forcibly kidnapped her to marry and mentally harassed her.
First Kidnapping Charge, Then Rape Accusation
Initially only an FIR alleging kidnapping was filed against the petitioner husband accusing him of forcibly taking the girl with an intention to marry by hatching a plan along with his friends and relatives and family members. Later Section 376 IPC was included alleging that the petitioner forcibly had physical relationship with her.
Karnataka High Court
The High Court of Karnataka through its impugned order had refused to quash the proceedings against the petitioner husband and other accused for the offences of kidnapping and rape relying on the complaint and the girl’s statement.
The Supreme Court had earlier stayed the impugned order in July 2019. Later the Court had asked the petitioner husband to join the investigation and directed the Investigating Officer to submit a report in a sealed cover for court’s benefit.
The Bench has now observed that materials placed on record clearly show that the marriage took place willingly between the petitioner man and the girl and it appears that the girl’s uncle is prima facie trying to settle scores as he holds a public office.
Expressing its dissatisfaction with the investigation carried out, the Bench observed that a completely pedantic approach has been adopted, and the investigation can hardly be called an investigation.
In an endeavour to find out whether a quietus can be put to the matter in some positive way, the Bench considered if appropriate to ask the petitioner husband and the wife to remain present in Court.
The Bench had observed that going though the complaint and the statement of the victim, it is noticed that the complainant (the girl’s uncle) has specifically alleged about the abduction of the victim with the assistance of other five accused. Further, the girl herself narrated the motive for the commission of the offence and has named all the petitioners in her statement.
After the husband’s counsel reiterated his stand that victim on her own accord had eloped with the man and a false case has been engineered to make the petitioners agree to the unlawful demands of the victim and her family, the High Court had questioned the girl the open Court.
The Court had noted that the victim stood by her statement given before the police and has reiterated that she has narrated the sequence of events and the role played by the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence in her statement.
The Supreme Court had however stayed the impugned order in July 2019.
READ ORDER Vinod Kumar vs The State Of Karnataka (Supreme Court of India)
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
We are not satisfied with the investigation carried out and a completely pedantic approach has been adopted. It can hardly be called an investigation. The materials placed on record clearly Signature Not Verified show that the marriage took place willingly between Digitally signed by Charanjeet kaur Date: 2021.12.16 17:47:33 IST Reason: the petitioner and the girl and it appears that the girl’s uncle is prima facie trying to settle scores as he holds a public office.
We did put to learned counsel for the complainant (uncle) as to what does the girl want since undisputedly she went away with the petitioner and married him of her own volition. The only thing being canvassed before us is that the petitioner had some pre-marital love affairs. This can hardly be a case under Section 376, IPC.
In an endeavour to find out whether a quietus can be put to the matter in some positive way, we consider appropriate that the petitioner/husband and the girl/wife should remain present in Court.
Interim orders to continue.
ALSO READ –
UP Man Spends 13-Months In Jail On False Kidnapping, Dowry Harassment Charges | Wife Found Living With Lover
Bombay High Court Acquits Man In False POCSO, Rape & Kidnapping Case As Relationship Was Consensual
Mother Of 3 Children Elopes With 15-Year-Old Boy | Woman Charged With Kidnapping & Not POCSO
Bengaluru Woman Who Went Missing From COVID Ambulance Staged Her Own Kidnapping
ALSO WATCH –
Tarun Tejpal Case | Sr Advocate Vikas Singh Argues How Victim Is No More A Victim After Acquittal
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
Blogging about Equal Rights for Men or writing about Gender Biased Laws is often looked upon as controversial, as many 'perceive' it Anti-Women. Due to this grey area - where we demand Equality in the true sense for all genders - most brands distance themselves from advertising on a portal like ours.
We, therefore, look forward to your support as donors who understand our work and are willing to partner in this endeavour to spread this cause. Do support our work to counter one sided gender biased narratives in the media.
To make an instant donation, click on the "Donate Now" button above. For information regarding donation via Bank Transfer, click here.
Follow Us
