Anil George vs State Of Kerala

G. Girish, J

The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.1775/2019 of Pala Police Station, a case registered in respect of the commission of offence under Section 376(1)(2)(n), 417 and 420 I.P.C. Upon filing final report, the said case was taken on to files by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pala as C.P.No.5/2020. The present petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing the aforesaid final report and all proceedings initiated against him in the said crime.

The prosecution case is that from the year 2012 to 2019, on various occasions, the petitioner subjected the de facto complainant/the second respondent to rape inside motor car and also in lodge rooms and other buildings, with the promise of marriage. It is also alleged that the petitioner obtained a huge amount from the de facto complainant and the daughter of CW3 by fraudulently and dishonestly inducing them that he would arrange job for them at Ireland. It is thus alleged that the petitioner neither married the de facto complainant nor arranged jobs to her and the daughter of CW3, and did not return the money obtained from them.

In the present petition, it is contended that the offences alleged against the petitioner are totally unsustainable since the de facto complainant did not raise any complaint despite her long physical relationship with the petitioner for a period of more than ten years. It is also stated that the issue has been amicably settled with the de facto complainant and that she had filed an affidavit to the effect that she is not at all interested in the further prosecution of this case.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the second respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

The second respondent who is the de facto complainant and the survivor of the offence of rape, has filed an affidavit dated 11.03.2020stating that the issues with the petitioner have been settled amicably in view of her previous friendship with the petitioner. It is further stated thereunder that the trial against the petitioner in connection with this crime is not at all necessitated since she has no subsisting grievance against the petitioner. CW3, the other person from whom the petitioner allegedly obtained money giving false promise to arrange job to her daughter at Ireland, also filed an affidavit stating that the dispute with the petitioner has been voluntarily settled and that there is no need to proceed with the trial against the petitioner. The learned counsel representing the second respondent, and the learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions from the Investigating Officer, submitted that the de facto complainant and CW3 have amicably settled the issues which gave rise to the present case.

It is true that in crimes of heinous nature like rape, murder etc. criminal prosecution cannot be terminated for the reason that the offenders managed to settle the issue with the aggrieved persons. But, as far as the present case is concerned, it is pertinent to note that the facts and circumstances of the case are capable of giving the indication that the sexual relationship between the petitioner and the de facto complainant over a period of more than seven years, inside motor car, and also in various lodges and other buildings at various places, was consensual. The fact that the de facto complainant was aware that the petitioner is a married man, would defeat her contention that the consent for sexual relationship was procured upon the promise of marriage. No prudent person could be expected to believe the offer of marriage by a married man, and extend her consent for sexual relationship. Therefore, the affidavit filed by the de facto complainant stating that the issue with the petitioner has been amicably settled in view of her previous friendship with him, would further throw light on the consensual sexual relationship between them. As regards the charge of cheating also, the affidavits filed by the de facto complainant and CW3 would go against the allegation of fraudulent and dishonest inducement on the part of the petitioner. In that view of the matter, the continuance of the prosecution against the petitioner would only be an abuse of process of court since the aggrieved persons would definitely turn against the prosecution during trial. When viewed in the above perspective, the termination of the prosecution proceedings against the petitioner is necessary to meet the ends of justice. Therefore, I am of the view that the present petition to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in Crime No.1775/2019 of Pala Police Station has to be allowed.

In the result, the petition stands allowed. The proceedings initiated against the petitioner in C.P.No.5/2020 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pala consequent to the filing of final report in Crime No.1775/2019 of Pala Police Station, are hereby quashed.