The Kerala High Court in a recent ruling quashed the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner, citing a significant and unexplained delay of 16 years in filing the rape case. The court emphasised that such a delay is fatal to the prosecution’s case, as it raises the possibility of false implications.
Justice A Badharudeen who was presiding over the case observed: “Law is well settled that delay is having significance and the same is decisive, unless the delay is properly explained. Here no proper explanation for the long delay. When the delay comes to 16 years in disclosing the same, after continuing the relationship for 16 years, the same is fatal and the same would stand in the way of prosecution, since possibility of false implication is very much discernible.”
The case involved allegations that the petitioner subjected the de facto complainant, a married woman, to rape in 2001. However, the crime was registered only in 2017, leading to charges under Sections 323 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate V Sethunath, argued that the First Information Report (FIR) was filed only after 16 years, and although the FIR initially implicated four persons, the final report was filed solely against the petitioner. The defence further contended that the petitioner had borrowed Rs 20 lakh from the complainant during their relationship, indicating that their sexual relationship was consensual. It was also stated that the parties had since settled the matter.
The court considered whether the 16-year delay in reporting the alleged sexual assault was detrimental to the prosecution’s case. It noted that the complainant continued her relationship with the petitioner even after the alleged incident in 2001 and that financial transactions between the two further complicated the nature of the relationship.
The HC further observed that the allegation of rape might have been raised with ulterior motives, particularly concerning the financial dealings between the parties. “The allegation of rape made after 16 years is prima facie not believable because of the long delay and such relationship is to be considered as consensual in nature. That apart, the allegation of rape was raised with ulterior motives, particularly when money from the accused was allegedly due to the defacto complainant,” the court remarked.
The judge also found that the complainant had no remaining grievances and had filed affidavits indicating that the issue had been settled.
In light of these findings, the court quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused.
Comments
0 comment