The Rajasthan High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against a a man accused of rape after the complainant agreed to withdraw the case and stated that they were happily married..Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed, "Since the prosecutrix “K” is leading a happy married life with the petitioner, this Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb their married life. Hence, under these circumstances, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner would hamper his marriage with the respondent “K”. This Court being constitutional Court must mercifully protect the feelings and married life of the respondent “K” who is a major lady.".The complainant came into contact with the petitioner through social media, following which they developed a friendship. On the basis of a promise of marriage made by the man, the woman entered into a physical relationship with him. However, when the woman became pregnant, the man allegedly administered abortion pills to her and ceased all communication with her, prompting her to lodge the complaint. Following the registration of the first information report (FIR), they got married. The man approached the High Court seeking quashing of the case on the basis of compromise and solemnisation of marriage between the parties..The Court referred to several Supreme Court orders that had allowed the quashing of FIRs in rape cases in view of the subsequent solemnisation of marriage between the parties. It also took note of the woman's submission that she was leading a harmonious marital life with the man and her in-laws, and that she did not wish to pursue the prosecution further.In this context, the Court observed that it could not ignore the ground realities or disrupt the marital relationship. It opined that allowing the proceedings to continue would adversely affect the marriage. While quashing the case, the Court stated,"Marriage is considered as sacred union between two individuals – transcending beyond physical, emotional and spiritual bonds. According to the ancient Hindu laws, marriage and its rituals are performed to pursue Dharma (duty), Artha (possessions), and Kama (physical desire). With such sanctity, marriage is more than a ritual, which cannot be allowed to be destroyed by continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner.".Advocate Anil Kumar Poonia appeared for the petitioner.Public Prosecutor Vivek Choudhary appeared for the State. Advocate Rajendra Singh appeared for the complainant..[Read Order]
The Rajasthan High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings against a a man accused of rape after the complainant agreed to withdraw the case and stated that they were happily married..Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand observed, "Since the prosecutrix “K” is leading a happy married life with the petitioner, this Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb their married life. Hence, under these circumstances, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner would hamper his marriage with the respondent “K”. This Court being constitutional Court must mercifully protect the feelings and married life of the respondent “K” who is a major lady.".The complainant came into contact with the petitioner through social media, following which they developed a friendship. On the basis of a promise of marriage made by the man, the woman entered into a physical relationship with him. However, when the woman became pregnant, the man allegedly administered abortion pills to her and ceased all communication with her, prompting her to lodge the complaint. Following the registration of the first information report (FIR), they got married. The man approached the High Court seeking quashing of the case on the basis of compromise and solemnisation of marriage between the parties..The Court referred to several Supreme Court orders that had allowed the quashing of FIRs in rape cases in view of the subsequent solemnisation of marriage between the parties. It also took note of the woman's submission that she was leading a harmonious marital life with the man and her in-laws, and that she did not wish to pursue the prosecution further.In this context, the Court observed that it could not ignore the ground realities or disrupt the marital relationship. It opined that allowing the proceedings to continue would adversely affect the marriage. While quashing the case, the Court stated,"Marriage is considered as sacred union between two individuals – transcending beyond physical, emotional and spiritual bonds. According to the ancient Hindu laws, marriage and its rituals are performed to pursue Dharma (duty), Artha (possessions), and Kama (physical desire). With such sanctity, marriage is more than a ritual, which cannot be allowed to be destroyed by continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner.".Advocate Anil Kumar Poonia appeared for the petitioner.Public Prosecutor Vivek Choudhary appeared for the State. Advocate Rajendra Singh appeared for the complainant..[Read Order]
