Reported By:
Final Up to date:
The HC famous that the complainant continued her relationship with the petitioner even after the alleged incident in 2001 and that monetary transactions between the 2 additional difficult the character of the connection. (File picture)
Whereas quashing the case, the courtroom noticed that the FIR was filed by the lady with an ulterior motive after the cash borrowed by the accused from the complainant turned due
The Kerala Excessive Courtroom in a current ruling quashed the prison proceedings initiated in opposition to the petitioner, citing a major and unexplained delay of 16 years in submitting the rape case. The courtroom emphasised that such a delay is deadly to the prosecution’s case, because it raises the potential of false implications.
Justice A Badharudeen who was presiding over the case noticed: “Regulation is nicely settled that delay is having significance and the identical is decisive, except the delay is correctly defined. Right here no correct rationalization for the lengthy delay. When the delay involves 16 years in disclosing the identical, after persevering with the connection for 16 years, the identical is deadly and the identical would stand in the best way of prosecution, since chance of false implication could be very a lot discernible.”
The case concerned allegations that the petitioner subjected the de facto complainant, a married lady, to rape in 2001. Nevertheless, the crime was registered solely in 2017, resulting in expenses beneath Sections 323 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate V Sethunath, argued that the First Info Report (FIR) was filed solely after 16 years, and though the FIR initially implicated 4 individuals, the ultimate report was filed solely in opposition to the petitioner. The defence additional contended that the petitioner had borrowed Rs 20 lakh from the complainant throughout their relationship, indicating that their sexual relationship was consensual. It was additionally said that the events had since settled the matter.
The courtroom thought of whether or not the 16-year delay in reporting the alleged sexual assault was detrimental to the prosecution’s case. It famous that the complainant continued her relationship with the petitioner even after the alleged incident in 2001 and that monetary transactions between the 2 additional difficult the character of the connection.
The HC additional noticed that the allegation of rape might need been raised with ulterior motives, significantly regarding the monetary dealings between the events. “The allegation of rape made after 16 years is prima facie not plausible due to the lengthy delay and such relationship is to be thought of as consensual in nature. That aside, the allegation of rape was raised with ulterior motives, significantly when cash from the accused was allegedly because of the defacto complainant,” the courtroom remarked.
The choose additionally discovered that the complainant had no remaining grievances and had filed affidavits indicating that the difficulty had been settled.
In mild of those findings, the courtroom quashed the prison proceedings in opposition to the accused.
