Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 89 (RAJ)

Kapil Jain v. State of Rajasthan

2020-01-08

VIJAY BISHNOI

body2020
JUDGMENT Vijay Bishnoi, J. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for quashing of FIR No. 301/2018 of Police Station Goverdhan Vilas, District Udaipur for the offence punishable under Section 384 IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegation levelled in the impugned FIR do not constitute the offence punishable under Section 384 IPC. It is submitted that as a matter of fact, the petitioner and the complainant solemnized marriage at Udaipur on 09.06.2018 and their marriage was also registered in the office of Marriage Registration Officer, Udaipur on 11.06.2018. It is submitted that at the time of marriage of the petitioner with the complainant, both were major and as per the above facts, the prosecutrix is legally wedded wife of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner neither threatened the complainant to live with him nor threatened her, that he would make her obscene photograph with him viral. It is submitted that from bare reading of the impugned FIR, it is clear that no offence punishable under Section 384 IPC is made out, hence, the impugned FIR is liable to be quashed and set aside. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed this criminal misc. petition and submitted that from the bare reading of the contents of the impugned FIR, it is clear that the impugned FIR do constitute a prima facie case against the petitioner, therefore, the impugned FIR cannot be quashed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. In the impugned FIR, the complainant has alleged that on 09.06.2018, the petitioner reached Udaipur and forced her to marry with him and threatened that if she will refuse, then he will make the whatsapp messages and obscene photographs of her viral on internet. It is further alleged that after threatening her, the petitioner took her to a temple and got married with her. It is further alleged that on 11.06.2018, the petitioner again pressurized the complainant to come to a particular place and when she went there he along with another person took her to the Office of the Marriage Registration Officer, Udaipur and got her signature in the said office forcibly. It is further alleged that on 11.06.2018, the petitioner again pressurized the complainant to come to a particular place and when she went there he along with another person took her to the Office of the Marriage Registration Officer, Udaipur and got her signature in the said office forcibly. It is also alleged that now the petitioner is regularly threatening her and instructing her to leave her parental house and come and live with him. 6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana & Ors. V/s. Bhajan Lal & Ors., (1992) SCC(Cri) 426 , has specifically held that if bare reading of the allegation levelled in the FIR do constitute a prima facie offence, FIR cannot be quashed. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the allegation levelled in the impugned FIR, this Court is of the opinion that the allegation contained in the impugned FIR do constitute a prima facie offence against the petitioner, may not be under Section 384 IPC but other offence under the IPC. 8. Hence, this criminal misc. petition is dismissed. 9. Stay petition also stands dismissed.