SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD,J. - (1.) This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for quashing F.I.R. No.338/2019, dated 06.09.2019, registered at Police Station Janakpuri, Delhi, for offences under Sections 509, 377, 313, 506, 376(2)(n) I.P.C.
(2.) The petitioner is accused of committing rape on the prosecutrix. The allegation in the FIR is that the prosecutrix met her friend, one Isha Gupta resident of Sarai Rohilla, Delhi, who introduced the petitioner/accused to the prosecutrix by stating that the accused is her friend. It is stated in the FIR that after two or three days Isha Gupta told the prosecutrix that the petitioner/accused wanted to meet her and wants to be friends with her. It is stated in the FIR that the prosecutrix refused this proposal by stating that she will only accept friendship from such a person who will marry her. Despite that the said Isha Gupta gave the mobile number of the prosecutrix to the accused. It is stated in the FIR that the accused started talking to the prosecutrix and insisted on meeting her. It is stated that on 03.03.2019, the accused and the prosecutrix met at hotel Oyo Town Pankha Road, Janakpuri. It is stated in the FIR that in the hotel the accused promised marriage and pressurized her to establish physical relationship with the prosecutrix. It is stated that in April, 2019 the accused came to the house of the prosecutrix and promised that he will talk to his mother about their marriage and established physical relationship with her. It is further stated in the FIR that later the accused called the prosecutrix to Karnal on the pretext of meeting his mother and for discussion about their marriage, the prosecutrix was put up at hotel Gopinath Grand, near Dayal Singh College, Karnal and he established physical relationship with her stating that he will introduce the prosecutrix to his mother. It is alleged that the accused forced her to have unnatural sex. It is stated that after that incident the prosecutrix had a fight with the accused but the accused assured her that he will marry the prosecutrix within 15 days. It is further stated that on 27.07.2019, once again, under the pretext of meeting his mother, the accused took the prosecutrix to hotel Yellow Sparrow, Namaste Chowk, Karnal where the prosecutrix told the accused that she is pregnant with the child of the accused. It is stated in the FIR that despite being told that the prosecutrix is pregnant the accused established physical relationship with her and it is alleged that the accused mixed some medicine in the food of the prosecutrix because of which the prosecutrix had a miscarriage. It is stated that on 25.08.2019, once again the accused called the prosecutrix to Karnal, admitted his guilt and established physical relationship with her. It is stated that after the act the accused refused to marry the prosecutrix and that he told her that he has already used her and that now she is of no use to him. It is stated in the FIR that the accused also threatened that he will put her photo on the internet which would tarnish her image. It is stated that after that incident, despite repeated attempts, the accused refused to marry the prosecutrix. It is also stated that the prosecutrix tried to contact the mother of the accused who threatened her that she will get cases filed against her and further she was threatened of dire consequences.
(3.) On the complaint of the prosecutrix, FIR No.338/2019 dated 06.09.2019, was registered at Police Station Janakpuri, Delhi for offences under Sections 509, 377, 313, 506, 376(2)(n) I.P.C. The petitioner was arrested on 12.09.2019 and has been released on bail on 18.11.2019. Arguments on charge were heard on 29.01.2020. The Additional Session Judge, South-West Dwarka Courts, Delhi, discharged the relatives of the accused but has held that there is substantial material on record to frame charges against the accused for offences punishable under Sections 376, 377, 376(2)(n), 509, 313, 323, 506 IPC and accordingly charges were framed against the accused.;