Sanjay Singh Jethi vs State

Court: Rajasthan High Court

Bench: JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

Sanjay Singh Jethi vs State & Anr on 25 May 2018

Law Point: 

JUDGEMENT

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA Judgment Date of Judgment: 25/05/2018 Through this miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the petitioner Sanjay Singh Jethi has approached this Court for quashing the FIR No.155/2017 lodged at the Police Station Mahila Thana, Jodhpur City (West) for the offence under Section 376 IPC.

It may be stated here, at the outset, that on the previous date of hearing, when the counsel engaged by the respondent No.2 complainant had appeared in the Court to argue the matter on her behalf, she was apprised of totally uncalled mails and letters sent by her to the petitioner’s employer. She categorically stated that she would be forwarding an apology letter in this regard. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, no one has appeared on behalf of the complainant and thus, this Court has proceeded to hear the matter ex-parte.

The FIR mentioned above came to be lodged by the respondent No.2 before the Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur Metropolitan with the following allegations:

“I am giving this application for your sincere concerned about the problem I am facing right right now. I was studying in standard 11th in 2007 with my colleague Sanjay Singh Jethi. We were in same class and in same stream. Sanjay made physical relation with me in 11 th Standard by the name of true love. As I was not aware about any thinks he made a CD of ours. On the basis of that CD he was making physical relation with me again and again. After completion of 12th Standard, he moved to Kurukshetra for hotel management. We were in touch through calls. Later, in 2012 he moved to Dubai. He then met me on 2016 Oct., at Jaipur and promised me to get married. In 2017, he met me in a married function of his friend and proposed for marriage. I accepted that and rejected all the proposed. Given by my family. He then said that his family is ready for our marriage proposed and on a particular inlervel he met me in Jaipur and UP. On 8th July, 2017, he decide for marriage and blocked me from every where. We have already sent him notice for the same but still, I did not get any response from him. I am mentally very disturbed so please suggest and help me in best & possible way. I want to marry him and want to get settled down.”

Learned counsel Ms. Vandana Bhansali representing the petitioner vehemently urged that ex-facie, the allegations levelled in the FIR are false and fabricated. The petitioner had for some time been in contact with the respondent No.2 way back in the year 2007 when both were students of XIth standard at Kendriya Vidhyalaya, Jodhpur. Thereafter, the petitioner moved on in his life and has achieved significant position and is presently having a lucrative job in Dubai. The complainant came to know of these facts from social media contact and thereafter, tried to misuse her casual contact with the petitioner and is virtually extorting and pressuring him to marry her, even though, there existed no such consensus between the petitioner and the complainant. The petitioner has never visited Jodhpur since the year 2007. She urged that even if the complainant’s conjectural and cooked up allegations as mentioned in the FIR are admitted to be true on the face of the record, admittedly the initial sexual relations between her and the petitioner were established with consent way back in the year 2007 when both were school students. The petitioner moved on to Kurukshetra after completing his schooling and did a course of hotel management. In the year 2012, he proceeded to Dubai. The complainant claims that the petitioner met her in the year 2016 at Jaipur and promised that he would marry her. Then, both met in a marriage function of the petitioner’s friend where, the petitioner allegedly proposed the complainant who accepted the proposal and turned down the offers received by her family. Both allegedly met at frequent intervals in Jaipur and U.P. However, on 08.07.2017, the petitioner allegedly blocked and repelled all attempts of contact by the complainant. The complainant allegedly became mentally disturbed upon failing to get response from the accused and sent him a notice stating that she desired to marry him. As per Ms. Bhansali, even in the highly dubitable allegations made in the FIR, there is no aspersion whatsoever that the petitioner ever established physical relations with the complainant after the year 2007. She urged that as a matter of fact, the complainant is trying to extort and blackmail the petitioner into marrying her. For this purpose, she initially got issued a notice to the petitioner through her advocate on 21.08.2017 and then, she filed the present FIR. She drew the Court’s attention to the statement of the complainant recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein, she improved the allegation set out in the FIR and alleged that the petitioner met her on few occasions at Jodhpur between the year 2008 and 2012 and then, he went away to Dubai for pursuing his job. Thereafter, the petitioner met the complainant in person in October, 2012 at Jaipur where, he came to Jaipur to attend a friend’s wedding. She stated that the petitioner established physical relations with her in the Hotel City Palace, Jaipur. In February, 2016, the petitioner again met her at Delhi where, he gave a proposal of marriage to the complainant. However, as per the complainant, on 08.08.2017, the petitioner communicated his refusal to marry her on the pretext that she was from Scheduled Caste background. As per Ms. Bhansali, crux of the allegations levelled by the complainant portrays that she is infatuated with the petitioner and desperate to marry him because of his status and nothing else. She contended that the petitioner never gave any fraudulent promise of marriage to the complainant and that physical relations, if any, were established with the desire and active consent of the complainant. She also drew the Court’s attention to the following paragraphs of the notice issued by the complainant’s counsel to the petitioner’s employer:

“In am writing this letter to you for your kind consideration in this serious matter. It is a sensitive issue; it is question of someone’s dignity, prestige and respect. Your are living in a country where rape is equal to someone’s death. Punishment of rape is bigger than anyone’s life and even he has raped a girl who is minority by group which we called as a Schedule caste.

Sanjay Singh Jethi, he is culprit, rapist and criminal That’s why he ran from India immediately and enjoying life as usual and normally but the girl is facing lots of problems and criticism, her life become more difficult. I am requesting you to take a strict action against the criminal; your action can help and motivate girls to fight for their justice. I am expecting your positive response. For more communication, I am giving my contact number and email address. Feel free to contact anytime and FIR copy, bail rejection letter in session court and other court order’s attached herewith.”

and urged that the words used therein clearly gave an indication regarding the attempt to somehow or the other malign and pressurise the petitioner to concede to the attempted blackmail of the complainant. On these grounds, she prayed that the impugned FIR deserves to be quashed.

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by the I.O., has vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioner’s counsel and urged that ex-facie, there is ample material on record to show that the petitioner gave a fraudulent assurance of marriage to the complainant and gained sexual favours from her under this pretext. Thereafter, he bluntly refused to standby his promise and is thus guilty of the offence of rape. He thus urged that the instant misc. petition should be rejected.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at bar and have gone through the material available on record as well as the case diary.

The respondent No.2 is a 26 years old highly qualified woman and can be presumed to be aware about consequences of her own acts. She claimed in the FIR that the initial sexual relationship between her and the petitioner was established in the year 2007. At that time, both were school students. Manifestly, there is no allegation in the complainant’s version regarding those sexual relations having been established by use of force or without her consent. Admittedly, the petitioner went away from Jodhpur in the year 2008 and proceeded to Dubai after doing the course of Hotel Management. It appears that the complainant who appears to be infatetated with the petitioner, could not get over the obsession of having a relationship with the petitioner and that is why, she continued to pursue him. It is she who voluntarily went to Jaipur to meet the petitioner in the year 2016. As per her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she stayed with the petitioner in the Hotel City Palace and there, physical relations were established between them. Though it is claimed by the complainant that these physical relations were against her consent but ex-facie, the said allegation appears to be totally fictitious and concocted. The petitioner, has all along maintained that he never gave any assurance or proposal of marriage to the complainant. Thus, the theory of proposal of marriage appears to be purely a creation of the complainant herself and is manifestly a pretext to coerce the petitioner into marrying her at any cost. The legal notice sent by the complainant’s counsel to the petitioner before lodging of the FIR also concludes with a demand that the petitioner should marry the complainant within a period of 10 days of receiving the notice so that the complainant can get rid of her emotional woes. Even in the FIR, the complainant has prayed that she wants to marry the petitioner and get settled down. Manifestly thus, the complainant who appears to be enamoured by the petitioner and his status in the society and has used the present prosecution to somehow or the other to attain her goal of marrying him. After perusing and appreciating the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR and the surrounding circumstances, this Court is of the firm opinion that the same does not disclose the necessary ingredients of the offence alleged. The registration of impugned FIR is nothing but a misuse of criminal process launched with the sole aim of coercing the petitioner to marry the complainant.

In view of the discussion made herein above, the instant misc. petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. The impugned FIR No.155/2017 lodged at the Police Station Mahila Thana, Jodhpur City (West) and all proceedings sought to be taken in furtherance thereof are hereby quashed.

DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.

You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us