The Delhi High Court has reiterated that an accused in a rape case can be convicted on the statement of the prosecutrix provided the statement is accepted by the Court and is found to be reliable, while dismissing a plea to quash the FIR against the accused. (Shri Aishwarya Bindal V The State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.)
However, the Court has directed the trial court to complete the trial expeditiously within a year, as the accused is a youngster and an engineering student and the entire life of the petitioner/accused is at stake.
A single-judge bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad said, “It is well settled that the powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are unlimited and that in the interest of justice, the High Court can make such orders as may be necessary to prevent abuse of the process of the Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.”
The Court pronounced its decision on a petition filed by a man accused and charged in a rape case on the false pretext of marriage. The prosecutrix levelled allegations against the accused person that he raped her several times in several different places/hotels on the false promise of marriage. The accused also levelled the allegations on the complainant/prosecutrix that she has forced him to make physical contact. The Delhi High Court said it’s a matter of trial and cannot be decided at this stage in writ jurisdiction.
It was also observed by the Court that “This is not a stage to determine as to whether the defence raised by the accused is correct or not. It is settled that even if the accused is successful in raising a suspicion or doubt in allegations levelled by the prosecution or the complainant, the High Court while entertaining a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR cannot evaluate the defence and discharge the accused before the trail.”
The Counsel appearing for the petitioner contends that the prosecutrix met the petitioner two times in jail which would show that the allegations against the petitioner are false. He also mentioned about the statement made by the Ms Isha Gupta (Common friend of prosecutrix and the accused)to the Police.
The Counsel appearing for the State mentioned that the petitioner is accused of heinous crime of rape. She stated that the statement of the prosecutrix alone is sufficient to convict the accused.
SMP11022021CRLMM1772021-174354-1The Court said, “The question as to whether the consent for intercourse was given due to promise of marriage or that the allegation of promise of marriage was a mere ruse to file a case against the accused/petitioner under Section 376 Cr.P.C or whether such a promise was made at all, can be determined only after the prosecutrix is examined and after the prosecution places the entire case. The fact that the prosecutrix has levelled a similar allegation against another person and has turned hostile, though is a very important fact but it alone cannot be the basis of quashing the complaint. It is for the prosecution to establish that it was the petitioner/accused who brought the prosecutrix to Karnal on the pretext of meeting his mother. This court, at this juncture, cannot go into the antecedents of the prosecutrix to quash the complaint as it would be improper to do so. The antecedents of the prosecutrix would be an important factor which the trial Court will have to take into account during the final hearing of the case. It is well settled that the petitioner can be convicted on the statement of the prosecutrix provided the statement is accepted by the Court and is found to be reliable. Both sides have given their own versions and the correctness of the version given by each side can be tested only during trial. The material relied on by the accused is not of such nature and is not sufficient to completely reject and over-rule the assertions contained in the complaint. This Court is therefore not inclined to quash the FIR on the basis of the available material.”
Read Also: If cleared, Cryptocurrency Bill will impose ban on cryptocurrency deals