On Thursday, the Supreme Court threw out an FIR against a man who was accused of raping a woman under the guise of marriage. The court said the complaint was a “bundle of lies” and that there was no evidence to support the claims.
The court observed that the FIR contained malicious and false accusations made by the accuser, which were not supported by evidence.
Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta were on a bench that said letting the suspects go to trial would be a travesty of justice and a gross abuse of the court’s process, according to PTI.
As the woman spoke, the court noticed that her words were naturally contradictory.
“The real complainant is a 30-year-old woman with a lot of education.” In the 2021 FIR, she only says that she had one sexual experience. Instead, the contested FIR of 2022 lists four to five similar events, all of which happened before the FIR of 2021, the court said.
“It is thus inherently improbable that the complainant would have forgotten or omitted to mention these incidents of sexual intercourse made under a false promise of marriage,” the judge said.
What did the case involve?
The man was arguing against an order from the Telangana High Court. The lower court turned down his request to throw out the rape charge against him.
The Supreme Court also said that the woman had the same charge against an assistant professor at Osmania University, where she was a student.
The high court stated that the woman admitted to being dishonest and attempting to “get a green card holder” during phone calls.
She also said at one point that it wouldn’t be hard for her to catch the next one. This very same sentence also says that she won’t waste time with the accused appellant and needs to focus on the next target. She also says that she would annoy her victims so much that they would leave her, and she would be happy to start over with the next one. She also said that she was using the accused applicant. “These chats show the harsh reality about the de facto complainant’s behaviour pattern, which seems to be based on manipulation and revenge,” the bench said, as reported by PTI.
The court also said that the accused had every right to feel scared and back out of the planned marriage when she learnt about the complainant’s “obsessive nature” and “aggressive” sexual behaviour.
“Hence, even assuming that the accused appellant retracted from his promise to marry the complainant, it cannot be said that he indulged in sexual intercourse with the de-facto complainant under a false promise of marriage or that he committed the offence with the complainant on the ground that she belonged to the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes community,” the judge said.
With help from PTI
